Forget tuition fees – students can't afford to live

 By David Ellis

There is no connection between the Mayan apocalypse forecast and my piece predicting the late rise in university applications, except that they came about within a couple of days of each other and were both subject to the same querulous scepticism. 

While the Maya proved to be mistaken, I’m relieved that I was not – and not just because I prefer being right. 

Admissions tutors spent their time trawling through almost 19,000 more submissions this year over last, a swell of 3.5 per cent. Assuredly encouraging, though not an opportunity for our Government to gloat – and certainly not sufficient cause for universities minister David Willetts proclamation that “there are no financial barriers to higher education”. 

This is clearly not true. The rise can perhaps be taken as indication sixth-formers have rightly realised tuition fees needn’t be an obstacle to education and student loan repayments are, in practice, a manageable graduate tax. But applications are still down 4.8 per cent on 2010, when increased fees made their unwelcome introduction. For applications to go up, something needs to change. 

And rather than needlessly tackling a tuition fee system which in most instances can work favourably for graduates, efforts must be made to confront the real problem: the rising and increasingly prohibitive cost of living. 

One student who wrote in to my website recently summed up the inadequacy of maintenance funding: “I don't drink and have a job, yet I am still £800 short on rent a term. In order to pay for my rent I have had weeks where I am living on around £10-£15, which is spent on food and only food. People need to seriously consider if university is appropriate.” 

It’s a common complaint. Student Money Saver polled 250 students to ask whether they worried more about their daily costs or about repaying their tuition fee after university. A conclusive 91 per cent replied daily costs. This should surprise nobody, given the expense of student living soared by 7 per cent during 2012 – a rise not matched by maintenance loans or grants. 

Cynical sixth-formers may be unlikely to factor in others’ experiences, but primary-school maths makes it clear the maintenance loan is insufficient. In a recession which just keeps on taking, student rents have grown at a rate unmatched by loans or grants; in Bristol, for instance, a midlevel, non-catered University hall rented on a short 39-week contract will cost £120 a week, or £4680 a year. Students entitled to borrow the maximum £5500 will live off the change of £880 – and those entitled to less will find themselves owing. 

For many, this money has to last them an entire year; the rent may only be 39 weeks but the funds have to stretch to all 52, in this instance working out at £15.77 a week. Enough to cover food, perhaps, but how about (recently inflated) train fares? A car is certain impossibility. It doesn’t leave change for even one vodka and coke, or half a cinema ticket. 

What about the means-tested maintenance loan? Unfortunately, it does not properly assess liquid household income. A student whose parents both earn the national average wage of £26,500 would receive no maintenance grant and a reduced loan. 

The system also assumes parents of students are willing and able to contribute to their offspring’s living costs – but what if the parents have to support other children as well? The government seems to recommend a reliance on parents or taking the risk of living on your overdraft. 

The message? “You might be able to scrape by. We’re not sure. Ask your parents.” Not an encouraging prospect for would-be undergrads. 

Squeezing a part-time job alongside a full-time education has gone from being a sensible idea to a necessity. Getting a job brings experience alongside its pay-packet and is recommended – but students shouldn’t be subject to three years of penury if they’re unable to source employment. 

Students have long struggled to balance months and money, but are more aware of their money than ever before. For a true bounce back in application figures, future sixth formers need firm reassurances of suitable loan and funding options. 

Vacant half-promises of lowering tuition fees are a waste now; that money must be put towards bettering maintenance provisions. If not, applications will plateau and students who aren’t viable for large grants and aren’t fortunate enough to have substantial financial backing will find themselves choosing between the local university or no university. Telegraph