W:
www.universitybusiness.co.uk | T: @UB_UK
F INANCE AND MARKETS | INSIGHT: LEGAL | 55
and improve social mobility. These initiatives have become more prevalent in recent years since the introduction of increased tuition fees, and without them, universities will struggle to atract and retain talented students who would otherwise not be able to afford a university education.
Kerren Daly
ON THE CUTTING EDGE Kerren Daly, partner and head of the education
sector at national business law firm DWF, assesses cuts to the Student Opportunity Fund
I
n January it was revealed that the government was seeking to cut £200m from the Student Opportunity
Fund, which helps disadvantaged students to pursue a university education. Leaked documents from the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills (BIS) warn that £570m needs to be saved this year and a further £860m after the 2015 election in order to reduce the economic deficit. These funding cuts have provoked
widespread opposition, led by the National Union of Students (NUS). Run by the Higher Education Funding
Council for England (HEFCE), the Student Opportunity Fund is open to all undergraduates and taught postgraduates and provides non-repayable grants of up to £1,000 for disadvantaged students. Typically they use the grants to atend education conferences and events, to fund collaborative projects or for venue hire and small equipment purchases. Those in favour of the scheme have called it the last direct funding of universities to enhance social mobility, but the impact of its removal will be much more widely felt. Without the Student Opportunity Fund, universities will face increasing
pressure to support students from disadvantaged backgrounds using money from other sources – at the moment, this does not exist. Ministers recently announced that public funding for universities is to be reduced by a further £125m this year. Although HEFCE has been instructed to deliver savings “in ways that protect” certain subjects such as science, technology, engineering and maths, and “avoid harming efforts to get more poor pupils into higher education”, it is difficult to see how this is possible. Higher education is widely believed
to be a key factor in improving social mobility, and many graduates go on to support the UK’s economy in key growth sectors such as finance, media, legal services and business management. Significant cuts to parts of the BIS budget, which is supposed to assist with widening participation, will inevitably result in fewer people from disadvantaged backgrounds entering these professions. This is a particular concern for
universities that atract many students from disadvantaged backgrounds; any funding cuts will have a negative impact on their ability to invest in outreach work
Wider impact While a reduction in funding will have a direct impact on student numbers, it will also have a significant knock-on effect for the wider economy. Universities will ultimately have to review their spending in all areas of the organisation, and this could result in potential redundancies, delays to necessary refurbishment or new-build campuses and a decrease in much-valued research and development projects. A further impact of the cuts to
higher education funding will be a reduction in the number of courses available to students. In a drive to bring down costs, universities will find it increasingly difficult to offer the range of courses they do now.
Looking to the future One of the most hard-felt implications of any cuts will be the decline of social mobility for future generations. It is vital that universities try and maintain their outreach initiatives in order to assist with the recruitment of students from socially-deprived backgrounds, and one way this may be achieved is through increased collaboration. It is becoming increasingly common
for universities to collaborate with other education institutions and the private sector to ‘plug’ budget cuts. Some universities may choose to merge but it is more likely that joint initiatives, where universities share staffing and resources, will become increasingly popular. Collaborative working in this way could provide one solution for universities to mitigate the harsh impact of these cuts. Whatever the solution, the crux of
the mater is if we decrease the pool of talent taking up university education is UK ‘plc’ going to be able to compete in a highly competitive global economy? It is not in dispute that we need a dynamic, highly educated and skilled economy fit for the 21st century. My view is that fundamentally this is not an HE sector issue – this is an issue that affects us all; this is about our collective future. Our political leaders and the business world need to recognise this now. UB
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68 |
Page 69 |
Page 70 |
Page 71 |
Page 72 |
Page 73 |
Page 74 |
Page 75 |
Page 76 |
Page 77 |
Page 78 |
Page 79 |
Page 80