Government cuts Founders' Building upkeep fund - The Founder

More documents

Recommendations

Info

6 The Founder | Wednesday 25 November 2009 News Government launches student fees review Amy Norman After several months of expectation and speculation, the government has finally launched a full review of tuition fees and student funding, leading to mixed reactions from students and academic groups. The review, a condition of the introduction of top-up fees in 2006, aims to overhaul the student funding system and will consider exactly what students should be charged for higher education, how to generate more funding from employers and how to make sure that students from poorer backgrounds are not put off by higher fees. The review is to lead by Lord Browne, the former chief executive of BP and one of New Labour’s favoured businessmen. The inquiry team also contains Sir Michael Barber, a former senior civil-servant who advised the government before the introduction of the current fees system; economist Diane Coyle; David Eastwood, vice-chancellor of Birmingham University; Julia King, vice-chancellor of Aston University; Rajay Naik, former chairman of the British Youth Council; and businessman Peter Sands. The review has been backed by the Conservatives, meaning that when it reports next year it is likely to exert a strong influence on whichever party is in power. However, one of the main criticisms of the review is the fact that its findings will not be published until after the general election, leading to allegations that the government has deliberately tried to stop the issue of tuition fees becoming an election issue. Wes Streeting, President of the NUS, has said that politicians will need the votes of the nearly two million UK students in the May election, and this “could make the difference between winning and losing the election for one of the parties”. He reminded politicians that in 2004 retaliation from students over topup fees caused considerable problems for Tony Blair’s government and resulted in several pro-fees MPs losing their seats. The NUS has promised to name and shame every MP who refuses to sign a pledge of opposition against an increase in tuition fees, revealing the names before next year’s polling day. The student leaders of 85 UK universities have guaranteed to break the “cosy consensus of silence” within the two main parties, saying they are “appalled by Labour and Conservative attempts to duck difficult questions on student fees”. Several protests have already taken place at Westminster calling for politicians of both parties to “come clean on fees” while last week a debate at Reading University’s Student Union, allowed both politicians and Mr Streeting to voice their sides of the arguments. The Liberal Democrats have fought back against the two main parties, with their shadow universities secretary, Stephen Williams, saying “Labour and the Tories have colluded to keep tuition fees off the agenda until after the election” and it is not fair to expect students and parents to vote for them “without being honest about whether they intend to leave them with decades of debt”. He also spoke out against the line up of the review panel, saying the lack of student representatives is “disgraceful.” The University and College Union is another group to criticise the panel, with general secretary Sally Hunt stating “we are Please recycle this newspaper when you are finished Recycling bins are located at: Arts Building, The Hub, Gowar and Wedderburn Halls, T-Dubbs incredibly disappointed that there is no proper employee representation on the panel.” She also said they would be “very surprised if the ‘independent’ argument holds much weight with anybody when they realise how well-represented employers and business are on the panel.” Director General of The Russell Group of Universities, Dr Wendy Piatt, has said “we greatly look forward to working with Lord Browne who brings a wealth of business experience and academic links to this review.” She said that as universities face increasingly tough economic conditions and global competition a change in the current system needs to be made to ensure UK universities remain internationally competitive, especially as the level of investment in UK higher education is significantly lower than other countries. The Russell Group state that “the introduction of fees has managed to halt a long-term decline in funding. Without fees, universities will have struggled to maintain facilities, retain leading academics and offer generous bursaries to poorer students.” While increasing tuition fees is the most “effective” way of raising funds, they want to “be sure about the impact of any changes to fee levels on students before advocating one particular option.” Debates and speculation as to what the final recommendations of the review looks set to continue until the report is finally published. With the issues under consideration potentially ushering in fundamental changes to way British universities operate, The Founder will continue to report on any further developments in what looks set to be a long running saga. Graduate unemployment rises in recession’s wake Laura Jones Graduate unemployment rates have soared this year by 44%, marking a twelve year high. The recession seems to have hit university graduates the hardest and unemployment is now threatening to reach pre-millennium heights last seen in 1995. The Higher Education Careers Services Unit (HECSU) warns that the pictures could be even more pessimistic for those about to graduate this year. As a result, the number of students now choosing to go into the public sector, either in the NHS, as teachers or even social workers has increased dramatically with half of all UK graduates now employed in such professions. On the other hand, architects and trained builders along with financial and accounting graduates have been among those worst affected by the economic downturn. There is no longer a call for rapid construction of new housing and fewer dreams of high flying careers as bankers in the city. Charlie Ball of HECSU has predicted that as the recession alleviates in 2010 there will be fewer graduates going into jobs in the public sector. He predicts that there will be fewer entry level positions available for local and central government, while ‘front-line’ jobs such as teaching and NHS work will be unaffected. Along with the current economic downturn, that has meant less employment for graduates, the sheer volume of school-leavers that now go on to university has been cited as a reason for graduate unemployment. According to the Times (20th October 2009) the number of graduate jobs available would have to double in the next 2 years simply in order to accommodate new graduates. With job prospects after graduation increasingly bleak, more students may decide to stay at university and do a masters degree or even PhD, however, according to HECSU the number of graduates staying on to partake in a masters barely rose last year. However despite continuing negative press that has questioned the value of a degree, on average graduates continue to earn more across their lifetimes.
The Founder | Wednesday 25 November 2009 tf Comment & Debate 7 The Holy Church of Global Warming Oleg Giberstein A comparably minor incident was the last straw which literally broke not the camel’s, but my back. I bought many items in the college shop and asked for a bag because not all of the items I bought would fit into my own. What I received was a paper bag which broke the moment I had left the shop. It is not easy to carry two or three bottles of water as well as other items at the same time, especially for a disabled person like me. Why did the shop stop using bags which do not break after walking two steps? They stopped in order to save the environment, the earth and the universe in its entirety. But let us start from the beginning. Humans seem to need a belief or faith to cling to. The western world is becoming more secular, but this does not mean that there is no need for ideology anymore. Old ones are simply being replaced by new ones. Thus, what dominates much of public discourse and our daily routine nowadays is the attempt to change our lives according to a new ideology: environmentalism. We recycle, we try not to use our car and we demonstrate against anything the Holy Church of Global Warming dislikes. We adjust our lives according to green ideas. At the same time companies around the world produce CO2 per day on levels none of us, even combined, could ever produce in a lifetime. Yet, it is me who has to suffer those little, and not so little but frequent, annoyances. Are we really making even the tiniest impact if we recycle or use paper bags? All of this happens, of course, under the assumption that global warming is actually man made. Hang on; is it really? Any counterevidence is immediately dismissed as being sponsored “by the industry” (as if those with supporting arguments did not have their own interests as well…). Yet, there is evidence for both sides. Why has the earth been cooling down and warming up for thousands of years without human influence? Why was the warmest recorded year so far 1998 and not 2007 or 2008? Speaking of 2007 and 2008, the planet actually cooled down significantly between these two years. The number of natural disasters has not increased since 1878 (instead, the recording and the media coverage have both been increasing). Against all claims, glaciers in Alaska and Southern Argentina have been growing lately, as have some other glaciers. Where is the warming? Such alternative voices however do not get much, if any, media coverage. After all, it does not fit into the green world view. Indeed, the whole movement is increasingly reminding me of the Catholic Church of the Middle Ages. While the Pope and the Cardinals of this modern Church (Al Gore, Prince Charles, various celebrities) live their good lives in huge, CO2 wasting homes and drive big cars, the grassroots inquisitors spread out to protest and ban whatever they can get hold of with sheer fundamentalism. Who would say anything against these inquisitors? At best, you will be ignored and treated like the heretic you are. At worst, you face literally social exclusion. You are not saving the environment, how dare you!?! Yet, all the time these people think they are going against the mainstream. This is not the case. Nowadays, many gain from the environmental alarmism. All those motivated activists have something nice to add to their CVs, politicians can get easy votes, many companies make money, and the media has a lot to talk about. After all, bad news sells better than good news anyway. All this alarmism has a resemblance of the late 70s when people panicked about a possible coming ice age. In fact, some of the activists of those days are now preaching the warming. Why should they not? It pays their bills. At the same time it seems like humans need something to panic about. This is fair enough as long as I do not have to be involved. Which brings us back to my initial encounter with the paper bags of the college shop. So much about this alarmism is purely and simply hypocritical. The paper bags save the environment? What about the plastic cups in the dining halls then? What about the college buses which never switch off their engine, even while they are waiting at the stop? What about the Founders heating, which is always running? Are all these issues not much worse than the bags, of which millions are produced every day around the earth no matter what we do? Maybe, but it is always easier to go for the easy targets. I lack the scientific credentials to dismiss all the environmentalist arguments myself and this is not my aim. I do not want to say that I (or anyone else for that matter) know if there is a manmade global warming or not. Nor do I want to attack all those dedicated activists who really have the best of intentions and invest a lot of time into their efforts, on campus and far beyond. Indeed, it does make sense to make the planet more sustainable, since resources will run out sooner or later. Also, certain changes improve the quality of the air or save some endangered species. However, this does not mean that we have to make our own lives miserable and accept every statement and issue of the modern day inquisitors, as absurd as it may be (just think of the cows and the methane gas) without questioning. The tiny impacts, which most of these annoyances that are inflicted upon us make, are so microscopic that it is not worth making our daily routines so much more complicated. Resist the Church of Global Warming and do not accept each single one of its demands simply for the sake of political correctness. I love nature. Yet, I hate it when anyone tries to direct my life according to some fanatic ideology, especially when so much is being done purely for the show and the own good conscience. When the Catholic Church was dominating the life of people in the Middle Ages, most of these people did not have an education to counter the clerical arguments. It is time to prove that 500 and more years later, we are smart enough to question each ideology that so radically tries to change our everyday lives, even if it comes concealed as progressive, urgent and necessary.
Page 1 and 2: Glorious 39 This year’s ‘Atonem
Page 3 and 4: The Founder | Wednesday 25 November
Page 5: The Founder | Wednesday 25 November
Page 11 and 12: E X T R A

Government cuts Founders' Building upkeep fund - The Founder

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?