Next week the Government is scheduled to release details of the Browne Review of Higher Education Funding and Student Finance, however some details have already been released – We know that the review will call for variable rate interest linked to graduate earnings, and to at least more than double fees to £7,000 from the current rate of £3,290 per year. The Guardian reports that a higher fee of £10,000 was considered but Browne understood that such a rise would be too “toxic”.

I reject every aspect of this report, right from the appointment of the person who spearheaded it – Baron Browne. Browne was Chief Executive of BP until 2007, when he resigned after allegations regarding his personal life and misuse of company funds; and he faced perjury charges for lying in court. He pushed for dangerous cuts that compromised safety at BP, making him largely responsible for multiple disasters, including the Deepwater Horizon explosion earlier this year. Browne’s only experience with regards to education comes in the form of being a Cambridge Graduate as well as graduating from Standford. He also allegedly has links to the partner of Peter Mandelson, who was responsible for the appointment, and also accepted a job from the present government, undermining [further] the independence of this review, say the University and Colleges Union.

One option laid out in the review, and apparently approved by both sides of the Government, is to introduced tiered interest rates for HE students from 2012; which would replace the current fixed 1.5% rate. This means that whilst graduates won’t be earning any more than at present (starting salary approximately £22,000 in 2009), they would be be expected to pay more back each month, putting them at greater risk of accumulating new debts as they struggle to balance rising living costs, the rise in VAT, and having to pay off more of their even larger student debt.

The review also recommends rising tuition fees to at least £7,000. Such a rise would do little to offset the savage funding cuts education and the wider society face, and in essence means students are paying more for the same, or worse quality of education than seen now as institutions are forced to stretch their funding to the limit. The biggest impact of raising these fees, however, is that it fatally undermines the viability of university education to persons from less-well-off backgrounds. Thousands more people will be denied the opportunity to learn, not because of their ability, but because of their income. Education plays a vital part in enabling social mobility, and graduates more than pay for themselves in graduate employment work over the course of their life. By reducing the number of graduates by excluding those from lower socio-economic backgrounds puts the economy at risk over a far greater period than presently seen with the global recession and deep spending cuts. An entire generation faces the prospect of long-term unemployment, large debts, and grossly reduced welfare and services to support them.

Raising tuition fees doesn’t just compromise society and the economy. A £7,000 means that we won’t just see a division of universities to elite institutions and lower quality colleges similar to polytechnics, but we risk seeing up to a quarter of the Higher Education sector struggle and perhaps collapse as the low-income students they rely on to survive are forced away from education due to costs. Additionally, science contributes billions to the UK economy, and being hit with the double-whammy of funding cuts and less graduates puts UK – and international collaborative research on the back burner, reducing economical contributions and delaying important scientific progress.

Prior to the General Election, over a thousand PPCs signed a pledge to oppose any rise in tuition fees, including Clegg and most of the Lib Dem MPs. Now-Deputy Prime Minister Nick Clegg also said in April that rising fees to £7,000 would be a “disaster”, and their manifesto pledged to scrap tuition fees entirely over 6 years. The Browne Review is likely to be the strongest test for the Liberal Democrats and the Coalition Government. Whether the Liberal Democrats will support the rise in fees, citing they “didn’t know how bad the deficit left by the last Labour Government really was”, and that “coalition government always means compromises”; or whether they will stick to their original pledges is yet to be seen, but I sadly expect we shall see the former.

12/10/10 Update: It’s even worse than expected. The review calls for uncapped fees, and lays out models for up to £12,000. Repayment of loans would also follow market rate, currently 2.2%+inflation. If implemented, this policy would throw away the ambitions and chance of success of an entire generation due to the mistakes of the older generations who took what they pleased, and leave us to pick up the tab and suffer the consequences. It is not on, and students, unions, and politicians across the country should not support any rise in fees, especially the Lib Dems, all of which signed the NUS pledge to oppose increasing tuition fees.

Next week the Government is scheduled to release details of the Browne Review of Higher Education Funding and Student Finance, however some details have already been released – We know...

Today, a general election was declared. It was also the day that the human rights infringing, industry-drafted, protectionist Digital Economy Bill had its 2nd Reading in the commons, before being passed through the wholly undemocratic process of wash-up in the coming days.

The controversial bill would see the death of public wi-fi, houses being disconnected on allegation of copyright infringement – with them having to prove innocence by paying for an appeal after the fact, photographers and works creators having work taken and exploited by industry without consent, or as one MP put it (in an endorsement of the bill!) – “putting creativity before freedom” – despite the fact the bill mentions not once the content creator or artist, and instead refers only to the rights holders – most often record labels or publishers, not the artists who created the works.

Understandably there has been outrage over the bill itself, and the government’s insistence on passing it without true scrutiny and debate: Over 20,000 letters and e-mails to MPs, over 35,000 signatures on the Number 10 petition against the bill, 100,000s of tweets, campaigns against the bill from consumer groups, business groups, ISPs, the  public, and the Pirate Party; concerns from the JCHR and the Law Society of Scotland that the bill breaches human rights, one of the  most discussed topics on social media worldwide, even on the day of the declaration of the election.

Guess how many of our great ‘Representatives’ turned up to the debate today?

(more…)

Today, a general election was declared. It was also the day that the human rights infringing, industry-drafted, protectionist Digital Economy Bill had its 2nd Reading in the commons, before being...

Today (March 3rd), marked Day 2 of the House of Lords Report Stage on the Digital Economy Bill, a government bill which seeks to undermine due process by disconnecting the internet connections of those accused of copyright infringement, without trial; amongst other things. The bill has drawn wide criticism from all sectors of society, including the Pirate Party, Open Rights Group, the ISP Talk Talk, musicians and directors, and the public.

One section of the bill (known as #debill on twitter); the controversial clause 17 – which would have given untold power to the Secretary of State to amend copyright however he, or lobbyists, saw fit. – was today replaced by a Liberal Democrat amendment, Amendment 120a. Whilst it’s good that the original clause is gone, what we now face in its stead is possibly even more terrifying.

This new clause 17, tabled by Lord Clement-Jones, adds a new section to the Copyrights, Designs, and Patents Act 1988, and allows copyright holders to file an injunction requiring ISPs to restrict access to websites and services that allegedly infringe their copyright, or link to said alleged infringements. So now, rather than the usual “this video has been removed due to copyright claims by Mediacompany Inc.”, when you try to view your favourite video on youtube, you’ll find “This website has been blocked in its entirety due to unauthorised hosting of copyrighted material” So then, maybe you try to go to google to find an alternate link to it, right? Wrong. “”This website has been blocked in its entirety due to unauthorised linking to sites hosting copyrighted material.” – This new clause has the potential to ban every single person in the UK from accessing search engines, youtube, or even social networking sites like facebook or twitter, if copyright holders make an allegation of copyright infringement.

The Liberal Democrats compared such a system to the Internet Watch Foundation – a small group who blacklist alleged child porn websites. You may recall the controversy over them restricting access to wikipedia for millions of people a couple of years back. What they don’t seem to grasp is that not only are copyright infringement, and child pornography fundamentally different, but that policing the net based on allegations of copyright infringement is no better than the content restriction we see in countries like Iran and China.

With the addition of this new web censorship clause, the Digital Economy Bill continues to become a larger and larger threat to liberty, rights, the internet, and somewhat ironically the ‘Digital Economy’ itself. If it passes into legislation, we are putting so much at risk, and we can’t afford to let that happen. The Bill will be going to the commons soon, and I urge you all to write to your MP about the bill, to inform them of the issues and hopefully have them oppose the bill in parliament. You can also help by fighting the bill, and fighting for your rights, by joining both the Pirate Party, and the Open Rights Group. Pirate Party UK stands for the reform of copyright, and protecting your privacy and freedom of speech, and costs just £10 a year (£2 if you’re under 21) to join.

The amendment can be seen in full below:

(more…)

Today (March 3rd), marked Day 2 of the House of Lords Report Stage on the Digital Economy Bill, a government bill which seeks to undermine due process by disconnecting the...

Well, it’s started with a change – Coordinated Universal Time  ticked over to read 2010:01:01:00:00:00, so that’s at least one thing that’s different; but just else will be different in this coming year to the years prior?

Firstly, VAT has just risen to 17.5% again, so expect price rises immediately, or phased in over time depending on the retailer. I would have thought it wise to have extended the VAT break to a later date, as a price rise whilst we’re only just approaching the end of the recession could run the risk of reducing sales, and leading to a double dip; many retailers, in deciding to freeze the increase for a while, seem to be thinking along similar lines.

Related to this, the UK, on May 6th most likely, will have a General Election. Unless a major upset happens, we’re currently looking at a Conservative Government with a small majority, or even forming a minority or coalition government from a hung parliament. But will a shift to a blue government really bring about much change, after all New Labour was an attempt to shift Labour towards the Conservatives, and Cameron’s Conservatives pull themselves towards New Labour? Yes, and no. Both sides promise dangerously low investment, and even cuts, in industry that desperately needs investment, such as eco-technology and energy, sciences, and education. Labour want to balance investment by cutting it in areas they don’t like, the Tories want to destroy the public sector, all the while supporting the renewal of hugely expensive, weapons of mass destruction. The Tories want to slash taxes for the rich, whilst doing little for the middle and lower classes, and Labour aren’t progressive enough to properly support those who need it. Labour risk destroying an entire sector of the economy, and people’s rights, with the ghastly Digital Economy Bill (which the Pirate Party, and non-party organisations such as ORG are fiercely opposing), whilst the Tories are so out of touch as to seem not to even care about the sector at all, with their pledge to scrap the much needed, albeit inadequate, “broadband tax”. So ultimately, we’re screwed either way.

But the winds of change do blow in politics this year. Approximately one-third of the House of Commons will consist of MPs new to the house following the election, with a likely small increase in independents, especially with Jury Team out there supporting them. Many of these new MPs will be replacing those corrupt, out-of-touch bastards who saw fit to abuse a ridiculously poorly regulated allowances system, squandering public money to pay for their first class seats, their mansions, their moats and trouser presses, and all the other crap they apparently can’t afford on their “chumps change” of a salary of £64,766 – some £40,000 more than the ‘average’ wage earner in the UK. Maybe, just maybe, these replacements will be less self-obsessed, more in touch with modern Britain, and able to represent their constituents properly. Maybe, but maybe not… I’m not getting my hopes up for this lot.  Assuming Mr Cameron has a brain, he’ll call an election in 2014 to coincide with the EU Elections, and that year, I feel, will be a big turning point in both British, and European politics. Indeed, 2014 is where I’m focussing my own efforts, not withstanding the results of the 2013 local elections, and where I plan to make my entry into politics under the banner of the Pirate Party of the United Kingdom if I do not do so in 2013.

Another change which will hopefully happen this year is the introduction of, or the preparations to introduce some form of electoral reform; however this will only happen if the Conservatives continue to fail to set themselves apart as anything other than “not-Labour”, and we end up with a Liberal coalition. Such a result is quite frankly the best outcome we could hope for. British politics needs radical change and sweeping reforms, and this would be the place to start, in this year. So let’s hope it happens.

Moving away from politics, 2010 will be bringing about many changes to my personal life. I’ve got exams in a few weeks, exams that will ultimately decide whether I get into Aberystwyth; my university of choice, have to utilise the terrible clearing system in a (post-)recession climate, or just end up not getting into university at all. This of course means I’m also finishing college this summer, and quite frankly I’ll be glad to be leaving, because that college was a pretty exhausting place to be, crushing and suppressing the hobbies, hopes and interests that I had when I first attended there. And running alongside all this, those few friends I do have will all also be heading off to university and whatnot themselves, so this year is really our last year together, and I want to spend as much of it as I can with them. In reality I realise I probably won’t see them much more than I did this past year, and that is upsetting to me; but even so, spending some time with them is better than none at all, right?

So there you go – 2010 will bring change right from the start, but it’s not necessarily good change, and that’s incredibly frustrating, especially for a powerless control freak like me, who just wants to be able to change things, make them better, improve on what we have.

Addendum: Whilst writing this post my  site went down, luckily I learnt long ago to always copy what I’ve written to the clipboard just in case something like this happens. Downside is I lost links and stuff I’d put in. Let this be a lesson to you all, copy to clipboard, and save drafts often. I also realised I never got around to talking about 2010 in technology like I planned, but I can’t be bothered to write more for this.

Well, it’s started with a change – Coordinated Universal Time  ticked over to read 2010:01:01:00:00:00, so that’s at least one thing that’s different; but just else will be different in...