Comment: Clegg’s flawed tuition fees defence
Nick Clegg’s self-defeating tuition fees letter to MPs is not a good starting point. The Liberal Democrat leader has a lot of persuading to do.
All Lib Dem MPs signed a pledge before the election opposing increases in tuition fees. Following Lord Browne’s review, business secretary Vince Cable has proposed doubling the amount universities are allowed to charge students to £7,000. And that’s just a possibility – the cap could still be removed altogether. You don’t have to be a political operative to realise that this is something of a disaster.
Backbenchers have reacted with dismay. Several have said they are not prepared to break their pre-election promise. Many Lib Dems rely on support from the large student populations in their constituencies. MPs will always prefer to back their party if it doesn’t affect their chances of re-election. It’s a measure of how toxic this issue is that so many cannot bear the thought of supporting the shift.
The man charged with their higher education policy before the general election, Stephen Williams, told politics.co.uk: “What I’m absolutely determined to achieve – and if we don’t achieve it I will vote against the government – is making sure people from poorer backgrounds in particular are not put off from accessing the top quality higher education institutions in our country.”
Clegg took the first step towards winning over the waverers in a letter to all Lib Dem MPs, made public yesterday by the LibDem Voice blog. Its approach is summed up in this sentence: “I understand there will be some colleagues who feel that they cannot depart from their pledge,” he writes, “but I urge them to only come to that final conclusion after a thorough examination of all the facts available.”
He’s trying to register support by clearly acknowledging he understands the dilemma being faced. This is swamped, though, by his overriding assertion that he’s right.
On first glance the latter doesn’t seem much of a problem. Clegg begins by saying he is “painfully aware” of that pre-election pledge. He ends by saying he has “struggled endlessly” with the dilemma. And, both at the beginning and the end, he adds that abandoning the pledge will be “one of the most difficult decisions” of his political career. All this will help MPs feel Clegg understands their problems.
The problem is the bulk of the letter, devoted to insisting he is right, destroys this idea. “There is no pain free alternative,” Clegg declares. He says Labour were making drastic university cuts in any case; rubbishes the “superficially attractive” graduate tax proposal as being unworkable; but ultimately retreats to the argument that the “disastrous financial situation” faced by the coalition means ministers have to take “tough decisions we would otherwise not have made”.
Clegg’s argument is all very well, but it struggles to address the key issue at the heart of the problem. Here’s his interpretation of the consequences of abandoning the pledge: “It means doing something that no one likes to do in politics – acknowledging that the assumptions we made at election time simply don’t work out in practice.”
The problem is these arguments don’t address the real problem – the true cost of the Lib Dems having to go back on their pledge. The U-turn is not just a personal admission that the party was wrong – because it’s understandable that drastically changed circumstances could force a change of stance. It undermines the idea of a pledge being immovable regardless.
There is nothing more comforting than the red line in negotiations – it can be stuck to whatever it takes. The Conservatives’ pledge to ringfence the NHS means raising other departments’ budgets by an extra five per cent, but the coalition is doing it anyway. The Lib Dem leadership does not seem to realise the gravity of its decision to abandon its tuition fees promise.
There is one ray of hope for Clegg: the Commons vote on this is not due in the next few hours, but in the next few months at the earliest. The consultation on Lord Browne’s review is expected to be followed by a white paper, before the tortuously lengthy progress of legislation through both houses of parliament.
“This is an enormously complex issue and we will take the time needed to get it right,” Clegg writes. “In that time, my door and Vince’s are open to any colleague who wants to make their case.” He must conjure up ways to compromise if the tuition fees circle is, somehow, going to be squared.
The views expressed in politics.co.uk’s comment pages are not necessarily those of the website or its owners.
