Chippenham students say tuition fee rise is unfair (From The Wiltshire Gazette and Herald)
Get involved! Send photos, video, news & views. Text WILTS GAZETTE to 80360 or email us
Chippenham students say tuition fee rise is unfair
11:31am Tuesday 30th November 2010 in News By Alex Winter
The protest in Chippenham today
Students from Hardenhuish School gathered at the Buttercross in Chippenham town centre today to protest against the rise in university fees.
Around 30 youngsters met at 10am and were expecting others, including Sheldon pupils, to join throughout the day.
Many had made banners and placards decrying the rise in fees, and they were chanting rhymes including “Six k? No way!”
Organiser Chris King, 17, said: “The rises are totally unjust and unfair when you consider that most of the people in the cabinet either went to Uni for free or are millionaires.
“We just wanted to show that we’re angry about this and we’re not going to sit quietly and let this happen.”
Most of the students who gathered are around 17 years old, and so may be directly affected by the increase in tuition fees.
Chris, who is a member of the UK Youth Parliament and the Wiltshire Assembly of Youth, said: “The government are continuing our involvement with Afghanistan and Iraq, but they are unwilling to put money behind the education of young people in this country.
“We are the future doctors and nurses and teachers of this country. We are a Lib Dem area and Nick Clegg has gone back on his word to support the students.”
Chippenham MP Duncan Hames was invited to attend the protests but declined to attend as he is in Parliament today.
Another student, aged 16, who wants to attend Winchester or Exeter, was also at the protest.
He said: “It is a very cold day but we want to stand firm and prove our point.
“We definitely want this to be a peaceful protest, I really doubt that it would ever turn into something nasty. Lots of people here are really enthusiastic and we want to make our point.”
Police had attended Hardenhuish to walk the pupils to the Buttercross, and will be remaining with them until 3pm, when the protest ends.
Chippenham Beat Manager Ashleigh Jones said: “They are all very polite and well-behaved.
“The students have the right to protest, as long as it is peaceful. We need to be here in case anything happens or if the protest were to turn violent, but I don’t believe it will at this stage.”
Comments(44)
Roy'O
says...
2:34pm Tue 30 Nov 10
I may pop along for a look when the blondes have their turn.
codgod
says...
3:35pm Tue 30 Nov 10
Wouldnt be so bad, but you know in 5 yrs time half of this lot will be serving in Mcdonalds.
LOL how ironic...my security words are meal-this
laurajayne895
says...
4:07pm Tue 30 Nov 10
firstly - stop discriminating against gingers, it rude and immature. i infact was there and am actually blonde? so shut it yeah.
secondly - raising the fee's from 3290 to 9000 is ridiculous! and for this fact we probably will end up in McDonald.. which is why we are trying to keep things how they are and not so that we cant afford a future.
Now when you get older you will probably want healthcare ect. how is that going to happen when we cant afford the training?
thirdly - yes it was cold, and yes we were noisy , however we were dedicated and got our point across.
the police were in full support of our debate before it even happened and were only there to overview the situation.
fourthly - some people don't have mummy and daddy to pay for everything, most of us who were there today already have a part time job and are paying for what we can.
basically GROW UP.
laurajayne895
says...
4:09pm Tue 30 Nov 10
firstly - stop discriminating against gingers, it rude and immature. i infact was there and am actually blonde? so shut it yeah.
secondly - raising the fee's from 3290 to 9000 is ridiculous! and for this fact we probably will end up in McDonald.. which is why we are trying to keep things how they are and not so that we cant afford a future.
Now when you get older you will probably want healthcare ect. how is that going to happen when we cant afford the training?
thirdly - yes it was cold, and yes we were noisy , however we were dedicated and got our point across.
the police were in full support of our debate before it even happened and were only there to overview the situation.
fourthly - some people don't have mummy and daddy to pay for everything, most of us who were there today already have a part time job and are paying for what we can.
basically GROW UP.
RochRoch
says...
4:16pm Tue 30 Nov 10
Triton
says...
4:36pm Tue 30 Nov 10
4:16pm Tue 30 Nov 10
"As a participant of this protest, i have every confidence is saying that everything in this article is the tuth"
.
Is that the whole tuth? :-)
.
The fact is that too many people are going to university and don't really have any academical right to do so. Most students think it is just a three year p1ss up with a little bit of paper at the end of the course. I know one post graduate degree student who couldn't even do basic maths.
Roy'O
says...
5:31pm Tue 30 Nov 10
Celebrate your differences I say.
RochRoch
says...
5:54pm Tue 30 Nov 10
blueboy1
says...
6:39pm Tue 30 Nov 10
Granti
says...
6:44pm Tue 30 Nov 10
Unfortunately it will get a lot worse as the tories strip the nations assets over the next 5 years.
TakeAChillPill
says...
8:00pm Tue 30 Nov 10
While I myself was not at today's protest, a great deal of my friends WERE at the protest, and from what I've seen and heard, it has been the most successful to date. I can also vouch that they were not loud to an extent that they were a public menace, and if in the event they were becoming a little too over-exuberant in their point-conveying, I'm sure the police presence that was there would have weighed in very professionally, as they should.
I'd like to back up my accusations of ridiculousness now with some stats:
When Tony Blair started New Labour's education reforms in his term that started in 1997, with the introduction of school's specialisations, he made an objective for the country to have 50% of it's young people enter university education, the current level is at 46%.
Scotland's universities have no tuition fees whatsoever, so raising them in England would give the Scots an unfair advantage in terms of academic achievement.
Personally, I believe that tuition fees TO AN EXTENT are a good thing, they provide for the equipment and world-class lecturers and professors that our country has become world-renowned for. However, raising tuition fees to almost triple their current standing is ridiculous, and it is also unfair to completely remove government funding from courses focussing on humanities and the arts.
Yer Tis
says...
9:01pm Tue 30 Nov 10
Granti wrote:Along with their best efforts to reintroduce feudalism for those less fortunate or able!!
Good on you all!
Unfortunately it will get a lot worse as the tories strip the nations assets over the next 5 years.
wiltshireborne
says...
10:26pm Tue 30 Nov 10
Or, do something constructive and come up with a viable alternative to higher education.
There's too many students drifting into higher education because they feel it's their right - I know, there was enough of them at my Uni. Spent more time in the bar than in lectures and the ones who did complete it got a third at best.
Was that really an efficient use of public money?
Now, before you reach for your soap box, I know this does not apply to all, but the ones that are so eager to be outraged are the ones I'm talking to here.
Many of you will try hard and get a good degree in a subject industry actually needs. However, just as many will not bother and many more will drop out. Is that fair to you?
Is it fair that so much money has previously been wasted by countless numbers of drifters who are more interested in partying that working?
Now, like I say, I've been through this only a few years ago so I do know how good it can be. I went to some amazing parties, ran several sports societies, and graduated with a first class degree in engineering.
25% of the first years on my course didn't make it to graduation. That was money well spent.
While the universities have a monopoly on post-school development, they will charge what they can get away with and will come up with all sorts of weird and wonderful courses just to attract more students. Will those courses be of any real use - what purpose does a degree in David Beckham actually serve?
So, perhaps all this eager teen energy could be better directed at chaning the rules so if you graduate, the government picks up some of the tab, if you graduate well, they pick up more of it and if you land a good job afterwards they pay it all - you'll pay far more back in tax.
But, if you party too hard and drop out, expect a nice big bill.
Jim Pancy
says...
11:01am Wed 1 Dec 10
RochRoch, you make some good points. My main quibble is that we do need a more educated work-force but does that have to be via the degree route? What about apprenticeships? People can be intelligent or skilled without necessarily being academic.
TakeAChillPill, you raise an interesting point about the Scots there. And you can throw the Welsh into the mix there too. But I bet it's the English who end up footing the bill. The subsidies we give them are outrageous. They like to be 'independent' when it comes to spending the money but as soon as they run a bit short they're like children running back to their parents for more.
indianunan
says...
1:48pm Wed 1 Dec 10
mjhudston: I am left a little puzzled by your comment, I feel it ceases to make sense towards the end, if what you are aiming to say is somehow a critscism of what we were doing I would suggest you re-word your statement so that we can explain anything you disagree with? I would also like to add that yes, we know it was cold, we walked out of sixth form in the snow and remained there for most of the day. Yes, I know we were loud, but what we were saying was not offensive to anyone and it grabbed the attention of passers by, whuch is, in my opinion, one of the main aims of any sort of protest or march.
Roy'O: I find your remarks, whilst in good humour I am sure, quite offensive. I am not a ginger myself, in fact, I am the blonde one in the photo. Also, I feel it should be brought to your attention that a number of school students as well as people who were barely sixteen were also in attendence, this automatically makes the suggestive nature of your comments wholly inappropriate.
codgod: Prehaps if you actually looked at the reason we are protesting you would re-word your critiscism. The thing is, as the fees per year are potentially tripling, there is no way we can afford to 'pay our own way' as you put it. The rise is sudden and dispproportionate, with no attempt being made to ease the public into preparing ourselves for such huge costs. So even those who, admittidly, have the help of 'mummy and daddy' can't afford it. And yes, i agree with you, we will be working in McDonalds in two or three years time. Not because we are unintelligent, far from it, but because we are unable to be qualified enough to go into the professional fields due to our inability to afford the excessive tuition fees.
triton: that is an incredibly stereotypical view of students. Yes, admittidly there are a few who do that, but is it really fair to stop everyone aside from the wealthy from continuing with higher education because a few people drink too much? No, it isn't. Plus, whilst some will get in whilst academically they do not flourish I am sure, but what about the people who do academic courses? Suerly they will be academically above average otherwise they wouldn't get in?
blueboy1: Please expland on your statement, I am most interested to see where you have got this assumption from.
As a further note, I would like to explain why I felt a protest was nessecary. I am not a skill-based person whatsoever, I am pretty terrible with numbers and science makes me feel flustered. However, when it comes to history, Religous studies and above all, english literature, I excell. All I have ever wanted to do is an english literature degree, because it will be a nessecary addition to my C.V so that I can go on with my chosen career path. I have had a keen interest in political matters from a very early age, for many years now, my ambition has been to have involvement with Amnesty International as a political journalist. I am very driven for this as a future career path, and have been involved in various debates and model united nation conferences around the world, each time disscussing human rights. This, and organising various charity events, is something I am so passionate about, but to make a real difference I need this degree. I want to make the difference, but at the moment I don't see debt until I'm in my fifties as an option. I am so terrified about my future now, yes we were noisy, yes we had police support, yes we missed a day of school, and yes not everybody who attends university will try their best. But I am prepared to, and will, surely you can not deny me, and so many others like myself, that?
The Maxter
says...
1:50pm Wed 1 Dec 10
Didn't stop her having a monumental 3 year p*ss up at my expense though. However, despite partying hard, she worked even harder in her science based degree, and now has an excellent job and is paying here way. -The problem as I see it, is for too long the 'Uni' route has been used by the government to take people off the unemployment register. Now it costing money, and its the students that have to pay, and that's not right. What IS right is that meaningless lifestyle courses are removed from the syllabus and the minor establishments that have grown up to cater for them have to start delivering something useful. However that still wont mask the reality that thousands of youngsters use education because they don't have a job to go to.
And well done to you sixth formers for getting off your backsides to protest and make your voice heard. the country needs young adults who can stand up for what's right and what they believe in.
The country indeed has a future while people like you are around.
maldives
says...
2:26pm Wed 1 Dec 10
I would like to say that I am currently studying from home on courses which were very expensive and I worked very hard to pay for.
So hopefully once I am properly qualified I will be able to get a better job.
What's wrong with children getting part time jobs to help fund their education?
Rowdey
says...
4:16pm Wed 1 Dec 10
Roy'O
says...
5:45pm Wed 1 Dec 10
1:48pm Wed 1 Dec 10
"However, when it comes to history, Religous studies and above all, english literature, I excell. All I have ever wanted to do is an english literature degree, because it will be a nessecary addition to my C.V so that I can go on with my chosen career path."
.
That should be NECASSARY.
Case closed. McDonalds it will be.
Roy'O
says...
5:51pm Wed 1 Dec 10
1:48pm Wed 1 Dec 10
.
"each time disscussing human rights."
.
Or try DISCUSSING the phrase "do you want fries with that?"
doodlyy
says...
6:18pm Wed 1 Dec 10
also, i hardly think it's fair of you to decide that people don't deserve to go to uni because of a few typos.
i don't think that everybody should 'have the right' to go to uni, but if people need it for their future careers, then what's wrong with that?
Roy'O
says...
6:31pm Wed 1 Dec 10
But hey, I never claimed to excell.
Anyway, what's all the fuss. They don't have to pay it back unless they get a good job, so most of it will be written off.
Mittens11
says...
7:20pm Wed 1 Dec 10
Admittedly, the protest is unlikely to alter the governments opinion as they are trying to get the country out of a recession and there have been cutbacks in every sector, nonetheless this should not go unnoticed and it is about time something changed. I believe it was mentioned earlier how Scotland and Wales receive free university education, would someone care to explain this to me or at least give me a reason as to why we can't charge them for university and therefore reduce the cost of studying in England and therefore acknowledge the fact it is slightly unfair?
Personally, I think once we are out of this recession the government will increase funding into university as this will make for a more intelligent, wealthier society and reduce unemployment and therefore reducing the millions of pounds the government have to pay out in benefits.
kerryw
says...
7:47pm Wed 1 Dec 10
I do hope you're enjoying getting such a response to your rude and ignorant comments, and also through your ironic attempt to correct a minor spelling error. I hope you feel some satisfaction in criticizing a 16 year old girl.
So please, tell us all about your education; what qualifications you happen to have and if you yourself have gone to uni.
It will be very interesting to see your background on this, and if your opinions have any ground.
And i myself, am a sixth form student, studying maths and chemistry; both respectable academic subjects, and hope very much to become a teacher in the future. For this it is imperative for me to go to university - no college or school offers and apprenticeship.
I have a part time job, and apart from living with my parents and having the necessaries of food etc, i pay for myself. I have never, ever sponged off my parents and I certainly don't intend to in later years, however, with this ridiculous increase of fees i honestly cannot see a way of being able to pay for my education.
i do agree somewhat, to university being open to too many people, but surely having a highly educated nation is far more beneficial than having it turn to depending on benefits and not being encouraged to succeed academically.
And please, feel free to pick holes in this comment. Your arrogance will be very much appreciated.
TakeAChillPill
says...
8:24pm Wed 1 Dec 10
Both Scotland and Wales have devolved power, meaning that important decisions such as their budget fall to their national assemblies. Devolution was introduced with Tony Blair's New Labour, and was thought to increase the amount of time that central government could spend on issues that mattered more, and that these devolved assemblies should be given a certain amount to divide up inside of their own countries. Hope that helped :)
indianunan
says...
8:47pm Wed 1 Dec 10
I think the crux of the matter is, to be perfectly honest, you realise that your immature comments were unnecessary. I also feel I should inform you that the reason I did not respond immediately to your goading was because I was busy revising for January modulars. However, by focusing on the more pedantic matters, we are as a result neglecting the more important matter.
I think a move away from petter bickering is in order and instead a focus on the potential rise in tution fees is far more deserving of our attentions.
indianunan
says...
8:49pm Wed 1 Dec 10
melaniehunt
says...
8:52pm Wed 1 Dec 10
I also think you're all forgetting that our generation are the future doctors, nurses, lawyers ect, meaning it will effect you, slightly, in the future.
Try not to be so narrow-minded and imagine being in our position, it's not as easy as you seem to think.
Roy'O
says...
9:08pm Wed 1 Dec 10
kerryw
says...
9:55pm Wed 1 Dec 10
I'm glad we can be so mature on the matter.
Roy'O
says...
10:58pm Wed 1 Dec 10
gracey1236
says...
11:57pm Wed 1 Dec 10
I believe that the drastic increase of university fees will have a significantly bad impact on the families without a great resource of cash.
However I feel that many students here have missed the point that they will not have to start paying back the fees until they are earning £21,000? Further more I believe that after a certain amount of years, the government has declared that they would ’write off’ any unpaid debt.
However the interest rate on student loans will increase to 3% plus inflation, with higher earners made to pay more. The government has also said that students who want to repay their loan early will have to pay extra and face as much as a 5% levy. However this may not affect students who can afford to pay their fees upfront. Clearly this shows the government having a preference for those with the money.
I personally believe that students should have to pay more for their education, because in this current situation, the government is unable to be paying for so many students to attend university. However, I do believe the current growth rate of costs to be to sharp an increase, and understand that students (myself included) are not going to be able to afford the costs.
frosch
says...
9:00am Thu 2 Dec 10
Jim Pancy
says...
10:28am Thu 2 Dec 10
Roy'O wrote:Behave, Roy! I know you didn't miss ‘Religious’ and ‘english’ either. With ‘excell’ the latter rendered the whole sentence a little ironic. Chances are, though, they were just the result of clumsy typing on this unwieldy forum as the original poster clearly isn't daft.
Yes, I threw that in hoping she would spot it, sadly you beat her to it. But hey, I never claimed to excell. Anyway, what's all the fuss. They don't have to pay it back unless they get a good job, so most of it will be written off.
Jim Pancy
says...
10:32am Thu 2 Dec 10
TakeAChillPill wrote:Or to put it another way, they're parasites.
Mittens11: "...I believe it was mentioned earlier how Scotland and Wales receive free university education, would someone care to explain this to me..." Both Scotland and Wales have devolved power, meaning that important decisions such as their budget fall to their national assemblies. Devolution was introduced with Tony Blair's New Labour, and was thought to increase the amount of time that central government could spend on issues that mattered more, and that these devolved assemblies should be given a certain amount to divide up inside of their own countries. Hope that helped :)
flaming cog
says...
5:17pm Thu 2 Dec 10
wiltshireborne
says...
7:42pm Thu 2 Dec 10
freddie_W
says...
9:00pm Thu 2 Dec 10
laurajayne895 wrote:I think you need to chill Jane, you will go to university to benefit yourself no-one else.Most of the kids going to uni are studying non academic subjects why should the tax payer foot the bill for some lemon studying travel and tourism.
right all you idiots above.
firstly - stop discriminating against gingers, it rude and immature. i infact was there and am actually blonde? so shut it yeah.
secondly - raising the fee's from 3290 to 9000 is ridiculous! and for this fact we probably will end up in McDonald.. which is why we are trying to keep things how they are and not so that we cant afford a future.
Now when you get older you will probably want healthcare ect. how is that going to happen when we cant afford the training?
thirdly - yes it was cold, and yes we were noisy , however we were dedicated and got our point across.
the police were in full support of our debate before it even happened and were only there to overview the situation.
fourthly - some people don't have mummy and daddy to pay for everything, most of us who were there today already have a part time job and are paying for what we can.
basically GROW UP.
indianunan
says...
9:04pm Thu 2 Dec 10
Also, I would like to fervently thank everyone who has supported me and my words on this forum and the teachers and students who have encouraged me in real life.
indianunan
says...
9:08pm Thu 2 Dec 10
TakeAChillPill
says...
10:21pm Thu 2 Dec 10
Jim Pancy wrote:No. VERY far from it.
TakeAChillPill wrote:Or to put it another way, they're parasites.
Mittens11: "...I believe it was mentioned earlier how Scotland and Wales receive free university education, would someone care to explain this to me..." Both Scotland and Wales have devolved power, meaning that important decisions such as their budget fall to their national assemblies. Devolution was introduced with Tony Blair's New Labour, and was thought to increase the amount of time that central government could spend on issues that mattered more, and that these devolved assemblies should be given a certain amount to divide up inside of their own countries. Hope that helped :)
In my opinion it is better to have devolved powers regarding some issues such as budget and education, as it makes it MUCH easier for parliament to focus on the "bigger picture", and let the devolved powers get on with their business.
Bear in mind that central government can un-devolve the national assemblies at any time, and thus reclaim power.
wiltshireborne
says...
12:53pm Fri 3 Dec 10
You're missing my point entirely. The hard working students who actually deserve to get money from the government will get a job, and will pay the money back and more in tax.
It's all the dossers that go to uni solely because they feel it is their right to waste tax payers money that concerns me. If they have the option to not pay it back then they will.
It's the same with the proposed new rules for housing where if you earn more, you have to move out. Why give an incentive to not try?!
Paul Tucker
says...
8:37am Tue 7 Dec 10
Nowadays, it seems that practically every A-level student assumes that going to a University is the only option. The increase in "universities", i.e. glorified further education colleges, has exacerbated this and "going to uni" is within practically every student's reach. It's an easy option, much easier than getting a job but inevitably leads to an increase in graduates and a glut in the market. The end result is that those who left school and got a job end up much better off than a lot of graduates who cannot get jobs but also have huge debts.
Obviously, certain degrees requiring a lot of study are necessary for certain careers but there are also a lot of degree courses which seem to be a bit pointless.
mjhudston says...
12:15pm Tue 30 Nov 10
That is how our taxes were being won't by the police this morning.