Increase citizenship fee for immigrants

We are told that it is beneficial for a student to pay £27000 in student fees to become a graduate.

I suggest that a very large fee be introduced in order to become a British citizen. Payable up front would be a good idea, too.

Perhaps £27000?

There is a large benefit in becoming a graduate, but there is probably a larger benefit in becoming a British citizen.

Why is this idea important?

We are told that it is beneficial for a student to pay £27000 in student fees to become a graduate.

I suggest that a very large fee be introduced in order to become a British citizen. Payable up front would be a good idea, too.

Perhaps £27000?

There is a large benefit in becoming a graduate, but there is probably a larger benefit in becoming a British citizen.

End discrimination of Swiss students

If you are a (close family member of a) EU national, you pay the reduced 'home' fee at Universities in England. There are residency requirements that you have not lived outside the European Economic Area or Switzerland in the three years before your course starts but there are no residency requirements for the UK.

If you are the child of a Swiss national, you also pay the reduced 'home' fee but you have to fulfil the above prior residency requirement AS WELL AS being resident in the United Kingdom on the first academic day of the first academic year of your course. For all courses beginning between August and December, this is universally defined as September 1.

The situation is thus that if an EU national and a child of a Swiss national both start a course in mid-October, the child of a Swiss national has to take up residence in the UK already on or before September 1, wheras the EU national can just arrive on the day his course actually starts.

The exactly same provision applies in terms of eligibility for student loans.

Such discrimination is unnecessary and unfair – EU and Swiss students should be treated similarly, otherwise the spirit of the Agreement on the Free Movement of Persons between the EU and Switzerland is violated.

Source: http://www.ukcisa.org.uk/student/info_sheets/tuition_fees_ewni.php  and http://www.opsi.gov.uk/si/si2009/uksi_20091555_en_18 (clauses 9 versus 11)

Why is this idea important?

If you are a (close family member of a) EU national, you pay the reduced 'home' fee at Universities in England. There are residency requirements that you have not lived outside the European Economic Area or Switzerland in the three years before your course starts but there are no residency requirements for the UK.

If you are the child of a Swiss national, you also pay the reduced 'home' fee but you have to fulfil the above prior residency requirement AS WELL AS being resident in the United Kingdom on the first academic day of the first academic year of your course. For all courses beginning between August and December, this is universally defined as September 1.

The situation is thus that if an EU national and a child of a Swiss national both start a course in mid-October, the child of a Swiss national has to take up residence in the UK already on or before September 1, wheras the EU national can just arrive on the day his course actually starts.

The exactly same provision applies in terms of eligibility for student loans.

Such discrimination is unnecessary and unfair – EU and Swiss students should be treated similarly, otherwise the spirit of the Agreement on the Free Movement of Persons between the EU and Switzerland is violated.

Source: http://www.ukcisa.org.uk/student/info_sheets/tuition_fees_ewni.php  and http://www.opsi.gov.uk/si/si2009/uksi_20091555_en_18 (clauses 9 versus 11)

Make the law accessible and judges more accountable

Cap fees for lawyers and educate judges to care about the quality of work carried out by lawyers. Review lawyers claims for costs on basis of work achieved and time that really needed to be spent. I would also provide transcripts of cases to litigants in person free of charge to help them challenge lazy judges. The methods of recourse when the legal systems fails are slow, inefficient and untrustworthy.

Why is this idea important?

Cap fees for lawyers and educate judges to care about the quality of work carried out by lawyers. Review lawyers claims for costs on basis of work achieved and time that really needed to be spent. I would also provide transcripts of cases to litigants in person free of charge to help them challenge lazy judges. The methods of recourse when the legal systems fails are slow, inefficient and untrustworthy.

Grammar schools within comprehensives and toughen up University entries

Entry to University should once again become much harder and much more competitive. Far too many who are not academically gifted get worthless degrees and end up with huge debts,no jobs,and a life on the dole when they could have been learning a useful trade.
Similarly we should restore a Grammar school system but not the iniquitous "11+" with its "one strike and you are out" mentality.Grammar schools could exist within our comprehensive schools as a sort of "elite" (don't faint ye who are politically correct !) so that those who develop late could be "promoted" at 12 or 13 without actually changing schools, and those who couldn't make the grade would simply return to the mainstream also without changing schools.
Rigorous "streaming" is essential to allow those who are able but from deprived backgrounds to make full use of their talents and put them at the service of the nation.

 

Why is this idea important?

Entry to University should once again become much harder and much more competitive. Far too many who are not academically gifted get worthless degrees and end up with huge debts,no jobs,and a life on the dole when they could have been learning a useful trade.
Similarly we should restore a Grammar school system but not the iniquitous "11+" with its "one strike and you are out" mentality.Grammar schools could exist within our comprehensive schools as a sort of "elite" (don't faint ye who are politically correct !) so that those who develop late could be "promoted" at 12 or 13 without actually changing schools, and those who couldn't make the grade would simply return to the mainstream also without changing schools.
Rigorous "streaming" is essential to allow those who are able but from deprived backgrounds to make full use of their talents and put them at the service of the nation.

 

increase the minimum age for the payment of full fare on public transport from 16 years

Young people below the age of 16 years currently pay half fare on public transport.  However, when they reach the age of 16 years they are required to pay full fare.  This law was created when the majority of young people went in to work at the age of 16 years.  Now, most young people remain in full time education until the age of 18 years or beyond and find it personally difficult to pay full fares to engage in social activities or in travel to educational institutions.  The responsibility for the payment of full fares on public transport for young people who are not in employment and in full time education becomes the responsibility of parents or guardians and this is becoming an increasingly difficult financial burden for them to bare.

Why is this idea important?

Young people below the age of 16 years currently pay half fare on public transport.  However, when they reach the age of 16 years they are required to pay full fare.  This law was created when the majority of young people went in to work at the age of 16 years.  Now, most young people remain in full time education until the age of 18 years or beyond and find it personally difficult to pay full fares to engage in social activities or in travel to educational institutions.  The responsibility for the payment of full fares on public transport for young people who are not in employment and in full time education becomes the responsibility of parents or guardians and this is becoming an increasingly difficult financial burden for them to bare.

Review of university fees – make the system fairer

 

The system needs updating. The way that the university fees are calculated simply does not work. I was at uni a couple of years ago and found a wide range of situations:

– rich parents who would not help their kids as they wanted them to learn to fend for themselves

– rich parents who paid for everything and the kids simply took out student loans so they could invest the money as it worked out better for them (and they have earned money without needing a job)

– poor parents who would/could not help with living expenses (kids did not pay fees)

– poor parents who helped out with living expenses and fees were not charged so effectively these kids had lots of money

The other situation that I think is rarely considered is the number of children a family has – is it right to charge the parents of triplets high fees for uni if they earn above a threshold when they have realistically less money to spend than a family on the same income with one child?

The current system removes money your parents pay into a pension from their total earnings, but not money they are paying to a mortgage. My mother moved house during my time at university and as she was 50 when she took out a £90k mortgage she was charged a lot each month. This was money that was not available to her so she had to reduce the amount she was paying into her pension, which subsequently slashed the amount I was able to get from my grant, even though she had less money in her pocket each month and I had not received any financial support from her (I never asked).

With many more people taking gap years these days, when students do start uni they are often much more mature and more independent and therefore less financially reliant on their parents, so why should their parents income have any bearing on their university fees?

I appreciate that fees cannot be scrapped completely but an overhaul is needed. It should be less heavily based on a parents income and maybe more closely linked to estimated earnings after a degree is completed (medicine costs more to teach and with F1s earning £30k should they not pay more in fees than someone who studies Biomedical Science which costs less to teach and has an estimated starting salary around £10k less? Law, whilst not necessarily costing more to teach, will net the student a higher salary, and therefore could be a good income earner helping to reduce fees for things like nurses, social workers etc)

Why is this idea important?

 

The system needs updating. The way that the university fees are calculated simply does not work. I was at uni a couple of years ago and found a wide range of situations:

– rich parents who would not help their kids as they wanted them to learn to fend for themselves

– rich parents who paid for everything and the kids simply took out student loans so they could invest the money as it worked out better for them (and they have earned money without needing a job)

– poor parents who would/could not help with living expenses (kids did not pay fees)

– poor parents who helped out with living expenses and fees were not charged so effectively these kids had lots of money

The other situation that I think is rarely considered is the number of children a family has – is it right to charge the parents of triplets high fees for uni if they earn above a threshold when they have realistically less money to spend than a family on the same income with one child?

The current system removes money your parents pay into a pension from their total earnings, but not money they are paying to a mortgage. My mother moved house during my time at university and as she was 50 when she took out a £90k mortgage she was charged a lot each month. This was money that was not available to her so she had to reduce the amount she was paying into her pension, which subsequently slashed the amount I was able to get from my grant, even though she had less money in her pocket each month and I had not received any financial support from her (I never asked).

With many more people taking gap years these days, when students do start uni they are often much more mature and more independent and therefore less financially reliant on their parents, so why should their parents income have any bearing on their university fees?

I appreciate that fees cannot be scrapped completely but an overhaul is needed. It should be less heavily based on a parents income and maybe more closely linked to estimated earnings after a degree is completed (medicine costs more to teach and with F1s earning £30k should they not pay more in fees than someone who studies Biomedical Science which costs less to teach and has an estimated starting salary around £10k less? Law, whilst not necessarily costing more to teach, will net the student a higher salary, and therefore could be a good income earner helping to reduce fees for things like nurses, social workers etc)