Unlock the editor’s summary for free
Roula Khalaf, editor of the FT, selects her favorite stories in this weekly newsletter.
The writer presided over a review of education after 18 for the May Government, 2018-19
The financial crisis facing English universities is the result of a failed experiment in the free market. Take into account the “free”. The three quarters are expected to be the losses for 2025-2026, a handful is receiving secret jumps and 10,000 jobs are under threat. Involuntary consequences of government policy, a lagoon in regulation and weak corporate governance have combined to undermine a radical change in higher education dating from a quarter of a century. The situation can be recovered, but doing so requires the government, universities and the regulator to change the tactics.
The seeds on the market were planted in 1998 with the introduction of undergraduate registration rates and student loans in England, aimed at finance the praise of Blair’s government to take 50 percent of young people to him. But it was the tutor of rates at £ 9,000 in 2012 (and eliminating the limit of the students’ numbers announced the following year) what unleashed it. No policy was evil or individually reckless. But without firm control, the combination was dangerous.
Encouraged to expand and given the means to do so, universities went to an expenses. Undergraduate numbers shot; Blair’s objective was achieved in 2020. But it is ebristic on greater growth and depending on the low inflation and interest rates, a significant number took advantage of its balances through the sale of assets and debt, instead of building reserves such as protection against future winds against. The wise lawyer of the governing bodies to keep the ambitious vice chairs under control was rare.
So was government control. The universities are autonomous institutions, but with £ 1.5 billion in subsidies paid directly to the institutions and an annual disbursement of student loans of more than 20 billion signed by the taxpayer, the public has the right to wait for Whitehall to supervise how their money is spent. Until 2018, this was mainly the responsibility of the Higher Education Financing Council for England, essentially a subsidy award body and place. It was replaced by a new regulator, the Office for Students, whose broad report included the duty to monitor and inform about financial sustainability. The OFS immediately warned that the growth plans of universities were based on “ambitious assumptions”, but was in configuration mode for two years and in a position to act.
With emerging evidence that a title was not a gold ticket for each graduate, it should have been a call of attention; The sector still had the space to change. Instead, a Joint document in 2019 Of two government departments, education and international trade, they gave higher education institutions an additional reason to defer self-scrutinium.
Established the objective of increasing the number of international students in a third during the next decade. This was a high margin business: international rates are double or triple those of university students and universities responded with a will, reaching the objective almost immediately. In 2021, the regulations that allow international students to remain and work in the United Kingdom for a period after graduating further increased this lucrative trade.
But the arrival of successive cohorts of international students and their families joined the net migration figures observed closely. In 2023, the Sunak government prohibited most international students from bringing relatives and in the election year of 2024, the then Secretary of the Interior ordered a rapid review of postgraduate visas. With economic problems in the central markets, the international number of students fell, leaving universities in a financial disaster.
Inflation, higher interest rates and long freezing in registration rates are the immediate causes of the crisis (the presidency panel recommended a cut in the rates replaced by an increase in subsidies), but the underlying causes must also be addressed.
The guaranteed rate and inflation plus subsidies increases are essential. But in return, suppliers must change. If students pay more, universities should be in advance about the use results of the course. The unique operating model for all must change with more collaboration, segmentation and differentiation between institutions. A commitment to life for life would restore a fall in adult education. Governance must be more acute.
The OFS needs the skills to recognize financial poor management and powers to prevent it. These should include the nuclear of vice chancellor’s salaries in case of financial catastrophe, a deterrent that has proven effective in financial services, another industry that is once characterized by a weak regulation of governance and light tactile. A market cuts two ways. The upper managers must be prepared to accept responsibility for failure, as well as the rewards of success.