OK, it's that old chestnut of tuition fees again, and here's the new story:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-11419172
And it's one section in particular that's got my goat this time:
I'm just staggered that they're even suggesting this. As it was I was against the 'graduate contribution' since this disregards the fact that your degree subject won't necessarily dictate your future earnings and as far as I'm concerned framing degrees in terms of earning power devalues the whole concept of academia. But to say that someone who's wealthy enough to start with to pay off the fees in full? In my mind that's a full-blown tax on social mobility. The best bit is that this is supposedly to placate the Lib Dems who are (rightly) concerned that the 'contribution' is a tax by another name.There is also the suggestion that high-earning graduates would pay an extra premium.
The report also suggests that wealthy students could avoid such an excess charge by paying their fees in advance.
I suppose I ought to point out that I've a personal axe to grind here, since I'm about to start a six year medical course, and don't especially want to have a £60,000 bill for tuition at the end of it, especially since I feel very strongly that medicine of all professions needs to represent a cross-section of society.
Sorry for the rant. That story just touched a pretty raw nerve.