University Education

Free university education should be a universal right, but it makes sense for other reasons too. It gives talented people, irrespective of background, the opportunity to gain the knowledge, skills and qualifications that countries need citizens to have if they are to compete in the modern global economy. It enables the less affluent to break out of the class they are born into and keeps society dynamic and aspirational. The state funding that allows free access also lets universities focus on what they do best, research and teaching, rather than administering fee payment and searching for private sponsorship. Claims that governments are no longer able to pay for free higher education because of competing demands on public finances conveniently ignore the fact that universities are free in some affluent countries. Any government with the will to do so – and surveys suggest they would be supported by the wider population – could shift spending away from unproductive sectors like defence and into higher education.

There is little doubt that degree programmes benefit from the level of state funding that is necessary to make higher education free for all. Where universities are largely self-financing, inordinate time, energy and talent is invested in attracting fee-paying students and research-supporting corporate investors. The fact that a number of countries around the world offer free university education of a very high standard proves that it is still a viable proposition, but it would undoubtedly be difficult for a country to change to such a system. Free higher education is ultimately paid for by taxes, and, in this day and age, taxpayers are generally unwilling to pay more, particularly if it is to enable young people, mostly from well-off backgrounds, to qualify for lucrative employment. The idea that free higher education benefits anyone apart from those who would attend fee-paying degree courses anyway is largely illusory.

State-funded, free university education is a fine idea in principle. Besides giving all individuals the opportunity to become, more knowledgeable and cultured, it also frees universities from the messy, distracting business of having to find ways to finance their work and allows them to focus on enhancing the student experience and carrying out research. The reality, however, is that the cost of paying for higher education is ruinously high for the state. Public-sector debt in many countries is astronomical, and governments have no choice but to prioritise spending. Unfortunately, higher education comes low down on the list of priorities. Also, the evidence suggests that people who want to go to university will generally find a way to finance themselves, whatever their class or background. Fee-paying does not particularly encourage underprivileged youngsters into higher education but neither does free university access.

In most modern economies, free university education is an illusion. Governments find it hard to provide adequate funds for healthcare, let alone a non-essential service like universities, and trying to convince people they should pay more taxes to finance university students is doomed to failure. States need university-educated citizens, but graduates can afford to pay for themselves, either up-front because of family background or retrospectively by paying off loans. Fee-paying makes no substantial difference to the number of people attending universities, and the figures suggest that people from particular socio-economic backgrounds are neither put off university by having to pay for it nor motivated to attend by having free access. In those countries where university fees have recently been introduced, the impact on universities themselves has been striking. Free of state influence, they have realised that they will only stay in business if they provide an excellent service to their clients, the students.