Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

A Long Path to Divergence: English and Scottish Policies on Tuition Fees

  • Article
  • Published:
Higher Education Policy Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This article addresses the diverging policies of England and Scotland since 1999 on the issue of tuition fees. While the UK Parliament has introduced (and henceforth enhanced the level of) tuition fees for students at English universities, the Scottish Parliament has refuted fees in two successive stages. In this article I trace the political processes leading to divergence, followed by a comparative analysis of the relevant parliamentary debates. I find that while all the three statewide parties have differed internally between arguments promoted in London and Edinburgh, Labour stands out as the party with the strongest thematic continuity. The Liberal Democrats, meanwhile, are distinctive in highlighting the opportunity to chart a separate course for Scotland. Finally, despite the diverging policy tracks of London and Edinburgh, there is a trend towards convergence between the legislatures in the thematic focus of debates.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. Deferred repayment implies that loans are offered at zero interest rate (controlled for inflation), with repayment commencing once the graduate has reached a basic threshold, then calculated as a percentage of the salary and subsiding after a given number of years (e.g. 25), if the entire loan has not been repaid. The alternative to this subsidized loan arrangement is a regular mortgage-type loan with fixed term payments.

  2. Parliamentary Hansard from Westminster was accessed on 6 February 2010 at http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm199798/cmhansrd/vo980316/debtext/80316-09.htm and http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200304/cmhansrd/vo040127/debtext/40127-06.htm#40127-06_head1. Parliamentary report from the Scottish Parliament was accessed on 8 February 2010 at http://www.scottish.parliament.uk/business/officialReports/meetingsParliament/or-00/or040601.htm and http://www.scottish.parliament.uk/business/officialreports/meetingsparliament/or-08/sor0228-02.htm#Col6487.

  3. The effectiveness of tuition fees in raising funds (7) was more debated in Westminster, certainly as an argument against Labour's proposed legislation. However, effectiveness was also a central part of SNP's case for abolishing the fees. In the 2008 debate, it was particularly prevalent in the ministerial statement by Fiona Hyslop (Cabinet Secretary for Education and Lifelong Learning) preceding the debate.

References

  • Angen, M.J. (2000) ‘Evaluating interpretive inquiry: reviewing the validity debate and opening the dialogue’, Qualitative Health Research 10 (3): 378–395.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ansell, B.W. (2008) ‘University challenges: Explaining institutional change in higher education’, World Politics 60 (1): 189–230.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barr, N. (2003) ‘Financing higher education: lessons from the UK debate’, Political Quarterly 74 (3): 371–381.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bergström, G. and Boréus, K. (2000) Textens Mening och Makt, Lund: Studentlitteratur.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bevir, M. and Rhodes, R.A.W. (2002) ‘Interpretive Theory’, in D. Marsh and G. Stoker (eds.) Theory and Methods in Political Science (2nd edn), Houndmills: Palgrave Macmillan, pp. 131–152.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bradbury, J. (2006) ‘British Political Parties and Devolution: Adapting to Multi-level Politics in Scotland and Wales’, in D. Hough and C. Jeffery (eds.) Devolution and Electoral Politics, Manchester: Manchester University Press, pp. 215–247.

    Google Scholar 

  • Callender, C. (2006) ‘Access to Higher Education in Britain: The Impact of Tuition Fees and Financial Assistance’, in P.N. Texeira, D.B. Johnstone, M.J. Rosa and H. Vossensteyn (eds.) Cost-Sharing and Accessibility in Higher Education: A Fairer Deal? Dordrecht: Springer, pp. 105–132.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cowley, P. and Stuart, M. (2005) ‘Parliament’, in A. Seldon and D. Kavanagh (eds.) The Blair Effect, 2001–5, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 20–42.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Craig, G., Burchardt, T. and Gordon, D. (eds.) (2008) Social Justice and Public Policy. Seeking Fairness in Diverse Societies, Bristol: The Policy Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Davie, G.E. (1961) The Democratic Intellect, Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Deschouwer, K. (2006) ‘Political Parties as Multi-level Organizations’, in R.S. Katz and W. Crotty (eds.) Handbook of Party Politics, London: Sage, pp. 291–300.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Esping-Andersen, G. (1996) Welfare States in Transition. National Adaptations in Global Economies, London: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fairclough, N. (2003) Analysing Discourse: Textual Analysis for Social Research, London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gillies, D. (2008) ‘The Politics of Scottish Education’, in T.G.K. Bryce and W.M. Humes (eds.) Scottish Education. Third Edition. Beyond Devolution, Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, pp. 80–89.

    Google Scholar 

  • Greenaway, D. and Haynes, M. (2003) ‘Funding higher education in the UK: the role of fees and loans’, The Economic Journal 113: 150–166.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Greer, S.L. (2004) Territorial Politics and Health Policy, Manchester: Manchester University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hardy, C., Harley, B. and Philips, N. (2004) ‘Discourse analysis and content analysis: Two solitudes?’ Qualitative Methods 2 (spring): 19–22.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hassan, G. (2004) ‘The People's Party, Still? The Sociology of Scotland's Leading Party’, in G. Hassan (ed.) The Scottish Labour Party. History, Institutions and Ideas, Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, pp. 1–18.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Humes, W. (2008) ‘Policy Making in Scottish Education’, in T.G.K. Bryce and W.M. Humes (eds.) Scottish Education. Third Edition. Beyond Devolution, Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, pp. 69–79.

    Google Scholar 

  • Keating, M. (2004) ‘Socialism, Territory and the National Question’, in G. Hassan (ed.) The Scottish Labour Party. History, Institutions and Ideas, Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, pp. 233–246.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Keating, M. (2005a) ‘Higher education in Scotland and England after devolution’, Regional and Federal Studies 15 (4): 423–435.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Keating, M. (2005b) ‘Policy convergence and divergence in Scotland under devolution’, Regional Studies 39 (4): 453–463.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Krippendorf, K. (2004) Content Analysis: An Introduction to Its Methodology (2nd edn), London: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lynch, P. (2003) ‘The Scottish Conservatives, 1997–2001: From Disaster to Devolution and Beyond’, in M. Garnett and P. Lynch (eds.) The Conservatives in Crisis, Manchester: Manchester University Press, pp. 164–181.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lynch, P. (2007) ‘Party system change in Britain: multi-party politics in a multi-level polity’, British Politics 2 (3): 323–346.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McCrone, D. (2008) ‘Culture, Nationalism and Scottish Education: Homogeneity and Diversity’, in T.G.K. Bryce and W.M. Humes (eds.) Scottish Education. Third Edition. Beyond Devolution, Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, pp. 224–234.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mooney, G., Scott, G. and Mulvey, G. (2008) ‘The “Celtic lion” and social policy: some thoughts on the SNP and social welfare’, Critical Social Policy 28 (3): 378–394.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Newall, D. (2008) ‘Scottish Higher Education: Policy and Funding’, in T.G.K. Bryce and W.M. Humes (eds.) Scottish Education. Third Edition. Beyond Devolution, Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, pp. 132–141.

    Google Scholar 

  • O’Leary, J. (2007) ‘Higher Education’, in A. Seldon (ed.) Blair's Britain, 1997–2007, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 468–484.

    Google Scholar 

  • Parry, R. (2002) ‘Delivery structures and policy development in post-devolution Scotland’, Social Policy & Society 1 (4): 315–324.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Paterson, L. (2001) ‘Higher education and European regionalism’, Pedagogy, Culture and Society 9 (2): 133–160.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Paterson, L., Brown, A., Curtis, J. and Hinds, K. (2001) New Scotland, New Politics? Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Peston, R. (2005) Brown's Britain, London: Short Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rothstein, B. (1998) Just Institutions Matter. The Moral and Political Logic of the Universal Welfare State, Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Russell, A. (2005) ‘The liberal democrat campaign’, Parliamentary Affairs 58 (4): 743–756.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Scott, G. and Mooney, G. (2009) ‘Poverty and social justice in the devolved Scotland: neoliberalism meets social democracy’, Social Policy & Society 8 (3): 379–389.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stevens, R. (2004) University to Uni. The Politics of Higher Education in England Since 1944, London: Politico's.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stirling, T. and Smith, R. (2002) ‘A matter of choice? Policy divergence in access to social housing post-devolution’, Housing Studies 18 (2): 145–158.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sturm, R. (2006) ‘The Adventure of Divergence: An Inquiry into the Preconditions for Institutional Diversity and Political Innovation after Political Decentralization’, in S.L. Greer (ed.) Territory, Democracy and Justice. Regionalism and Federalism in Western Democracies, Houndmills: Palgrave Macmillan, pp. 139–156.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Trench, A. (2008) ‘Devolution and higher education: Impact and future trends’, Research report, Universities UK, http://www.universitiesuk.ac.uk/Publications/Documents/DevolutionAndHE.pdf, accessed on 14 June 2010.

  • Woodhall, M. and Richards, K. (2008) ‘Student and University Funding in Devolved Governments in the United Kingdom’, in P.N. Texeira, D.B. Johnstone, M.J. Rosa and H. Vossensteyn (eds.) Cost-Sharing and Accessibility in Higher Education: A Fairer Deal? Dordrecht: Springer, pp. 189–212.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

A draft version of this article was presented at a research seminar at the Department of Political Science, University of Oslo, on 2 March 2010. I am particularly grateful to Knut Heidar, Anders Jupskås, Rune Karlsen and Amund Lie for helpful comments on the draft.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Political Science, University of Oslo, P.O. Box 1097 Blindern, OSLO, N0317, Norway

    Øivind Bratberg

Authors
  1. Øivind Bratberg
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Bratberg, Ø. A Long Path to Divergence: English and Scottish Policies on Tuition Fees. High Educ Policy 24, 285–306 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1057/hep.2011.5

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/hep.2011.5

Keywords

Search

Navigation