Letter: Untruths behind clamour for a graduate tax

Sir: I am sorry to see the Independent join the clamour for Britain to be the first country to introduce a graduate tax (leading article, 24 June). It is based on several myths.

The first is that we need a lot more students. In fact, if we count part-timers, as other countries do, 40 per cent of our population enters higher education, a percentage higher than our European partners. The second is that our higher education is expensive. In fact as a percentage of national income it has fallen from 1 per cent in the late 1970s to 0.85 per cent today, and is lower than most other OECD countries. The third myth is that the economy needs more graduates. In fact success rates in British universities are higher than other OECD countries, and the quality of our courses remains internationally respected, so the flow of able graduates is high. Fourth, is that not enough students do science degrees. In fact more than a third of our first degrees are in a science-based subject, higher than any other OECD country except France.

A graduate tax is neither necessary nor desirable. An evolution of the present loans scheme (repaid through the tax system if you like) and extension of the means-testing of grants to include a contribution to fees by students from richer families, as happened till the mid-1970s, could provide any additional funding necessary.

The real problem for mass higher education is to ensure that outstanding institutions like the London School of Economics are recognised as international centres of excellence. There are two ways of achieving this. One is through the market, the other is through planning.

I doubt whether the higher education funding councils, or the Government, or the Labour Party, have the guts to grasp this nettle. Its director is therefore right to seek to preserve the special position of the LSE by proposing a market solution.

Yours sincerely,

GARETH WILLIAMS

Institute of Education

University of London

London, WC1

24 June