So uni fees are going to increase?

[nearlylovemyusername]

University sector calls on Labour to raise tuition fees to ‘stabilise the ship’ (ft.com)

Given paywall, the essence it this:

"One former university vice-chancellor said the fact that Labour had acknowledged the sector was “in crisis” indicated that Labour leader Sir Keir Starmer and Phillipson, who have not ruled out a tuition fee increase, were likely to act.

“The short-term pain of putting up fees could be blamed on the Tory inheritance . . . and then traded against a transition to a better deal for young people, which Labour can deliver before next general election,” he said."

So it won't be limited by VAT on PS, uni fees will be up, potentially significantly and repayments for higher earning grads will go up much more - this is what artical says.

The idea dc play football in the streets or back yards is long gone too, but schools run teams and there’s football clubs for juniors just about everywhere. If you want it, you can find it. Rugby is a bit more spread out but still there, as is cricket. Lots of teams are 100% Asian families though. They just know each other! Lots of schools do netball and court based games. Rugby and lacrosse take space and a lacrosse league might be difficult to find as it requires a big pitch! These days I think there’s lots of opportunities for sport.

But they do play football in the street and back yards.

They kick a ball almost anywhere they can, the little park at the end of the road, but most importantly, in the school yard etc.

Cricket usually requires club membership/access to nets/equipment making it much more of a middle class pursuit.

School sports, in PE lessons, wouldn't provide the skills needed to succeed in a sport. Most children develop their skills outside of school.

Football is the only sport where private school students are under represented for this reason. It's also why private school students are over represented in rowing, cricket, hockey etc, you need lessons, club memberships, equipment to succeed.

Only on MN could people turn up on a thread about uni fees and pronounce that rowing is a working class sport and football not!

@titchy Im not remotely pretending rowing is universally available but what I said, and it’s true: secondary schools row. How do you think Steve Redgrave started? At Oxbridge? No he didn’t. He didn’t pass the Bucks 11 plus and went to a secondary modern. Back then it was very very bog standard but they had boats. Why on earth do we have to have this stupid class debate about sport? Plus I didn’t mention sport - others did with wringing hand views. I’m merely pointing out all things are possible even if you don’t go to uni!

Anyone can play football. Since when is it purely working class? Utter rubbish. It’s skill based and that’s why it’s a leveller. I said availability of rivers matter for rowing but the state schools don’t exclude dc from rowing! Rowing has tried very hard to increase participation but sport participation seems, in some minds, to be yet another thing some dc cannot do. Like uni. I disagree.

"secondary schools row. "

Some, not massively represented. Almost all private secondaries do.

"Since when is it purely working class? Utter rubbish."

Not what was said.

"It's skill based so it's a leveller" and it needs no expensive club memberships or equipment, which is why private school kids are under represented at the top levels.

If you want to see how dominant private schools are in rowing btw, go look at the schools competing in the national schools rowing championships ( hosted at Eton Dorney).

“Almost all private secondaries row”. Complete and utter B-ll-ocks. Are you for real?

Dorney is where the Olympics were held.

Ok, almost all of the private secondaries that I know of, and I know of a lot, have rowing teams.

Go to any regatta and you're going to find a lot of private schools there.

I know.

Quite interesting that Eton gave the land over, then got an Olympic standard stadium built there, and got to keep it.

@Aladdinzane British Rowing, British Fencing etc - all these charitable organisations - do you wish to tax them as well?

And @alladinzane you still have not answered my question as to what type of child you consider international in London private schools. Seeing that you teach in one of them you must have a view? Is a child with one foreign born parent international or not?

You seem to count anyone who has a foreign parent or is an ethnic minority as international, it's wrong.

I'd only count you as an international student if you were only here for the purposes of education, like the government does.

Nothing like a good bit of conflation.

@Alladinzane - it is not conflation. You are openly stating that these are elitist sports under represented in state schools, for example. You have literally made it a class issue. Some of us have disagreed. It is perfectly natural to then ask if you agree with the charitable status of what you deem elitist sports.

“You seem to count anyone who has a foreign parent or is an ethnic minority as international, it's wrong.

I'd only count you as an international student if you were only here for the purposes of education, like the government does.“

It is not “wrong”. I was simply pointing out that the demographic of private school students and there parents in London falls into this group. It is more of a common sense definition of international. 41% of Londoners are born abroad. Many have acquired British citizenship and pay a lot of tax and work in the capital. Many have dual or even triple citizenship and the right to live and work in a foreign country. That is a fact.

It is a conflation, and a weird one.

It is wrong.

It's not what the government defines as an international student, you have your own, slightly racist and xenophobic definitions for some reason.

“It's not what the government defines as an international student, you have your own, slightly racist and xenophobic definitions for some reason.“

Now you are really stooping low.

I am simply pointing out that some of our cash cows in London who would send their DC to uni here (and some of which have kids in private schools too) are international and have options to send their DC abroad for uni, in some cases cheaper that what they can find here. I think the percentages are far higher than you care to acknowledge for some reason. If you actually do work in an elite London private school, you absolutely would know that what I am saying is correct.

It is not “wrong”. I was simply pointing out that the demographic of private school students and there parents in London falls into this group. It is more of a common sense definition of international. 41% of Londoners are born abroad. Many have acquired British citizenship and pay a lot of tax and work in the capital. Many have dual or even triple citizenship and the right to live and work in a foreign country. That is a fact.

But their kids aren't foreigners. FFS if they're born here, with a UK passport, they're not internationals. Irrespective of their heritage. Are you Nigel Farage?

I'm really not sure how this thread strayed into rowing or weird definitions of international school kids. (Or VAT for that matter.)

I never used the word “foreigner” @titchy. I used the word “international”. That to me means has the right to live and work in another country usually through having a foreign born parent with that nationality. May mean being fluent in a second language to which gives further mobility. I am simply stating the obvious fact that a lot of these young people have the means to go and study and work abroad by reason of who their parents are. It is literally the opposite of xenophobia/racism. A lot of kids are in this position now.
Whether you like it or not, the world is an increasingly global place competing for the same talent globally.

This is your statement on what you consider international.

Basically anyone with a foriegn parent or who is from an ethnic minority.

So yes, a bit xenophobic and a bit racist.

No @alladinzane - you are deliberately obfuscating to try and discredit my arguments. Being international is a privilege, it gives young people options and opportunities in other countries. It means we have to work hard to keep them here and to keep them happy.
It’s absolutely vital we recognise this and understand how many of our young and talented and educated are in that position.

I'm certainly not obfuscating, that's why I quoted you directly. It's there for all to see.

Most people who you would consider "international" under your definition do not have the other options in other countries.

International students as the government defines it, probably do.

@alladinzane- what are you talking about? Most other nations permit dual nationality. I can only think of some notable exceptions like China. Even India allows OCI now, that means most children with Indian heritage can work and live in India for life, if they wanted to. Most Canadians, Europeans, Australians, US etc etc - all these dual nationals of which there are a ton in London in particular, absolutely have options to go elsewhere to both work and study. A lot of people from the African subcontinent still have ties and businesses there. Add in the Dubai and Middle Eastern golden visas a ton of young graduates have options to go abroad. It’s not just limited to junior doctors! We have to recognise this. Many young and talented school leavers and graduates are really not trapped here.

So let’s try and keep them here and educate them in a way that incentivises them to stay. There are plenty of competitor countries offering the same or a better quality of life and work/life balance.