The House of Commons has recently decided to scrap the maintenance grant, a system in place to ensure equal financial footing for undergraduates. At the majority of British universities, maintenance loans barely cover accommodation costs, meaning that the grant is unquestionably valuable in providing support for a large number of students. With the current tuition fees situation, maintenance grants help to ensure equality of opportunities and access, dispelling financial disadvantage.

This detrimental cut would perhaps be more justifiable if it seemed that the government had seriously thought it through and considered how a system of alternative funding would be implemented. For students, the action would seem more reasonable if the government had had a full parliamentary debate, and voted on the issue democratically.

Instead, the Tory government are pushing for an ill-informed scrapping of the grant. It was passed through the House of Commons without proper debate by a committee of 18 MPs, of whom ten voted for the cut and eight against. Although over half a million students in England receive maintenance grants, a group of 18 MPs somehow have the power to decide their future.

The maintenance grant is an essential means of support for many students who would not otherwise be able to afford to go to university. The government are seemingly ignoring students’ and parents’ concerns alike about the potential damage this cut will cause, and appear incapable of understanding the struggles it could create. Poorer students may now leave university with over £60,000 of debt, which will only act as a further deterrent from pursuing higher education.

University choice may become increasingly influenced by the cost of the area, the distance from home and the length of the course, rather than being led by personal course preference and university calibre. The additional financial burden of scrapping maintenance grants also undermines the idea that one might want to go to university for the enjoyment of education. The cuts appear regressive, attacking the poorest amongst our student body, and causing a step back in equal access to higher education.

The government have justified their action by claiming it will bring in money to remedy the deficit. However this makes little sense, as the government are also claiming that students will pay back the same amount regardless of the change. The government’s single-minded aim of reducing the deficit at any cost is merely shifting the debt onto the individual. It seems the government are out of touch with their people and have failed to fully assess the real impact these cuts will have.

In the National Union of Students’ (NUS) survey of those receiving maintenance grants, 52 per cent said it was absolutely essential to their university attendance, and a further 30 per cent claimed it was important or very important. It appears the government have ignored serious concerns about the cost of living, the pressure to get holiday jobs, and the need to support family at home. This, combined with the seemingly undemocratic process used to pass these cuts, will spread distrust in the government.
These cuts are not the only major change that the government is trying to implement, nor is it the only measure introduced in a seemingly underhand way. The changing of the terms and conditions of current loans, together with the proposal of increasing fees in line with inflation, are ideas that will create problems for students. Further policies, such as the Teaching Excellence Framework (TEF) which will rank universities on the quality of their teaching and allow tuition fee increases, are causes for concern. Metric systems such as graduates’ income, the foundation of this system, will have the potential to transform higher education into a market, and also reverse years of access work at the University of Cambridge. We may no longer be able to tell students that Cambridge will cost the same as any other university, thereby entrenching perceptions of the University as an elitist institution.

This wider context of the government’s higher education policies, and the undemocratic processes they are using to implement them, is revealing about the government’s perception of education. Education should be accessible to everyone, and based on merit rather than privilege. Education is a fundamental right, and in no circumstances should this right be undermined. It seems the government are trying to turn the higher education system into a market, students into consumers and education into a commodity. The increase in tuition fees started this gradual process, and everyone, regardless of financial support, should be concerned about where these changes will lead.