UNIVERSITIES are reluctant to criticise ministerial policy on tuition fees because they fear repercussions, a leading principal has warned.
Professor Craig Mahoney of the University of West Scotland (UWS), said charging students for higher education would provide much-needed income for institutions, but the issue was rarely discussed because "opposing government policy isn't always welcomed".
The concerns echo those of the business community in the run up to the independence referendum with Prime Minister David Cameron accusing SNP ministers of trying to "intimidate" companies that opposed independence.
Free tuition for students north of the Border is one of the flagship policies of the Scottish Government with former First Minister Alex Salmond saying "rocks would melt with the sun" before the policy would be changed.
However, Mr Mahoney suggested the issue should be opened up for discussion because fee income could provide more funding to improve UWS's facilities and provide more student support.
He said: "I believe this is a conversation we have to have. I believe there is an appetite to discuss this, but the concern is, if you are seen to be affronting current government policy, that may cause problems."
Mr Mahoney also complained that grants from the Scottish Funding Council (SFC) provided the equivalent of about £8,000 per student, leaving his institution with a multi-million pound shortfall compared with English institutions.
In addition, some 1,600 UWS students are classed as "fees only", meaning the university receives only £1,820 per student and does not receive the teaching grant element from the funding council - leaving another £10m gap.
A Scottish Government spokesman said: "Ministers and officials engage frequently with partners in the higher education sector on policy issues."
He said it was "firmly committed" to both higher education and free tuition with universities receiving in excess of £4 billion of investment through the SFC in the last four years.
He said: "We believe access to education should be based on the ability to learn, not the ability to pay. As a result, more than 120,000 students attending universities in Scotland are not obliged to pay annual fees of up to £9000 charged elsewhere in the UK. This is important for them, their families and the economy.
"Our higher education institutions are also world leading with four of our universities in the world's top 200, more than any other country per head of population apart from Switzerland."
Mr Mahoney's comments, in an interview with the Times Higher Education Supplement, were attacked by students and lecturers, who back the SNP's stance on free tuition.
A spokesman for UCU Scotland, which represents university lecturers, said: "We've not seen evidence of the debate on funding being shut down in Scotland, but the arguments against introducing fees stand on their own."
Gordon Maloney, president of student body NUS Scotland, said any notion of a "conspiracy of silence" or "fear of debate" on the issue of tuition fees was "bizarre".
He added: "Since the start of devolution we have, rightly, had a very public debate about the issue of charging for higher education in Scotland in any form.
"The reason it's rarely an issue these days is that there's a broad consensus that free education is the right thing for Scotland. This isn't just government, it's a widely supported policy right across the Scottish Parliament and society."
A spokeswoman for the UWS students' association criticised the focus placed on "consumerist ideology" by their principal and said he was losing the confidence of staff and students.
She said: "We firmly believe the reintroduction of tuition fees is wrong both morally and economically. UWS is one of the best institutions for opening its doors to students from widening access backgrounds and the reintroduction of tuition fees would hit this group the hardest.
"Our students are becoming angry and confused by our principal's calls for the reintroduction of tuition fees. The argument that students will become more focused in their education if fees are introduced is one that we believe is false."
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article