Follow on Google News News By Tag * University * Education * Browne * Higher Education * Student * National Union Of Students * Nus * More Tags... Industry News News By Location Country(s) Industry News
Follow on Google News | Panelists clash on Browne Review during NUS Panel DiscussionThe Browne Review was the subject of a panel discussion on 26 October, during which three expert speakers outlined their differences to an audience of students and academics.
By: EM Applications The panel discussion explored how to meet the cost of higher education. Three experts – two from academia, one from the finance sector - analysed the relevant systems, structures, numbers, incentives, value, and the fairness of different university funding models. They debated whether the Browne Review has made the right proposals, both on market issues and on a more practical level. Amongst the questions explored by the panel was whether Lord Browne's proposals on graduate payment were progressive. Panelist Peter Ainsworth, Managing Director of EM Applications, pointed out: “Progressive normally means that the higher the income, the the more is paid. As the maximum payable under Browne is fixed, that is clearly not the case. Therefore the Browne Review cannot be considered to be progressive.” While the panel agreed on favouring increasing the individual’s contribution to the costs and on using markets to a greater extent in higher education, they disagreed on how this should be implemented. Peter Ainsworth’s proposal is that pension funds would pay the university in exchange for a share of the graduates’ income during their working life. Peter Ainsworth explained: “The idea is that the government sets two numbers – the proportion of a graduate’s income to be paid, and the number of years it should be paid. This is then pledged to the university. The university takes all those pledges and hands them over to a pension fund investor, who will pay a capital sum in exchange for the student’s future income. Because payments are always proportional to income, the scheme encourages wide access and is progressive. The universities would receive more money from the pension fund investor the better their graduates do in the workplace, so there is a direct alignment of interests between student and university.” The discussion was chaired by the NUS’ Political Officer, Graeme Wise. The panelists were: • Nick Barr, Professor of Public Economics, London School of Economics and Political Science. Nick has written extensively on higher education finance and, along with lain Crawford, was responsible for designing the income-contingent loan system that has been used since 1998. • Neil Shephard, Professor of Economics, University of Oxford and Director of Research, Oxford Man Institute Neil’s concept of 'deferred fees', and his 'slicing' model for loan repayments have both caught the eye of policy makers at the UK Department for Business, Innovation and Skills (BIS) and beyond. • Peter Ainsworth, Managing Director, EM Applications Peter is Managing Director of EM Applications, a leading supplier of investment risk solutions to asset managers and securities firms. He has designed a novel funding model that occupies a space between the graduate tax and the tools of global financial institutions. EM Applications’ - Ends - Contacts For a copy of the report, or for interview requests, please contact Andrea Krug, tel. 07740 245 867, emapplications@ Notes to Editors About EM Applications EM Applications (www.emapplications.com) About the panel discussion The panel discussion “Meeting the costs of higher education” took place on Tuesday, 26th October 2010, from 1.45 pm to 2.45 pm at the Adelphi Hotel, Ranelagh Place, Liverpool, Merseyside, L3 5UL. Further details about the NUS’ Higher Education Zone Conference are available at http://www.nusconnect.org.uk/ # # # EM Applications is a leading supplier of investment risk solutions to asset managers and securities firms. End
|
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Account Phone Number