MPs challenge Scottish government on fees and research

MPs warn it is “highly doubtful” the Scottish government’s position on tuition fees would be legally sustainable if the country became independent

August 9, 2014

A new report from the House of Commons Business, Innovation and Skills Committee – all of whose members are MPs from pro-union parties – also concluded that it is unlikely that the current UK research network would continue after independence.

One of the key issues for higher education after independence would be whether the Scottish government can continue its policy of free university education for students domiciled in Scotland while charging up to £9,000 for those from the rest of the UK.

The argument turns on whether the European Union – which generally permits such discrimination within member states but not between them – would allow this.

“The current policy of charging tuition fees for non-domiciled UK students provides a significant source of income to Scottish universities,” concludes the report, titled ‘The Implications of Scottish Independence on Business; Higher Education and Research; and Postal Services’.

“Despite the special circumstances highlighted by the Scottish Government it is highly doubtful that this policy will be compatible with EU Membership. The Scottish Government must therefore set out how it will replace the financial shortfall of not being able to levy tuition fees only on students from the rest of the United Kingdom,” the report says.

Another issue at stake is whether or not an independent Scotland and the remainder of the UK would agree to keep the existing UK-wide research councils.

The Scottish government has argued it would be in both sides’ interest to continue the arrangement.

But the report says it is “unclear whether the common research area is either practical or desirable in a post-independence United Kingdom”.

As Scotland wins a greater proportion of this funding than it would if it were distributed in relation to population or gross domestic product, this could be seen as a diversion of funds from the UK to a separate country, the report adds.

To avoid this would require “detailed negotiations” over the future set-up of the councils, it continues.

“In any case, a complicated formula for the distribution of funds is very likely to undermine the economies of scale currently enjoyed by universities bidding within a single country,” the report concludes.

You've reached your article limit

Register to continue

Registration is free and only takes a moment. Once registered you can read a total of 3 articles each month, plus:

  • Sign up for the editor's highlights
  • Receive World University Rankings news first
  • Get job alerts, shortlist jobs and save job searches
  • Participate in reader discussions and post comments

Have your say

Log in or register to post comments

Featured Jobs

Post-doctoral Research Associate in Chemistry

University Of Western Australia

PACE Data Support Officer

Macquarie University - Sydney Australia

Associate Lecturer in Nursing

Central Queensland University
See all jobs

Most Commented

women leapfrog. Vintage

Robert MacIntosh and Kevin O’Gorman offer advice on climbing the career ladder

Woman pulling blind down over an eye
Liz Morrish reflects on why she chose to tackle the failings of the neoliberal academy from the outside
White cliffs of Dover

From Australia to Singapore, David Matthews and John Elmes weigh the pros and cons of likely destinations

Mitch Blunt illustration (23 March 2017)

Without more conservative perspectives in the academy, lawmakers will increasingly ignore and potentially defund social science, says Musa al-Gharbi

Michael Parkin illustration (9 March 2017)

Cramming study into the shortest possible time will impoverish the student experience and drive an even greater wedge between research-enabled permanent staff and the growing underclass of flexible teaching staff, says Tom Cutterham