The Tories must give young people an alternative to Left-wing universities

Our society was once packed with people whose inability to attend university stifled their potential. Now, the reverse is true: the latest figures show that 50.2 per cent of 17- to 20-year-olds in England have had higher education. Sadly, many have studied courses of little intellectual value at institutions undeserving of public subsidy. Many who can obtain a degree only by studying a substandard course are wasting their own and the state’s money by spending three years at university.

The lowest-ranked university in England, Ravensbourne University, London, offers degrees in Advertising and Brand Design, Digital Photography and Fashion Promotion. The next lowest, Suffolk, offers Event and Tourism Management. These are aptitudes far better learnt on the job, or as apprenticeships.

When realistic tuition fees were introduced – now £9,250 a year – one hoped the market would work, and people would see that spending £27,750 on a pointless degree was not worth it. Sadly, the decision by the Major government to abolish polytechnics – which embodied a valuable concept of mainly vocational education – and call them universities raised expectations unrealistically. New institutions created new courses and provided posts for some poor teachers; and they produced graduates many of whom will never find a career commensurate with what they had been led to believe were their intellectual achievements.

A civilised society should consider it a basic human right that anyone whose intellect would be developed by a traditional, rigorous university course, whether vocational or in the humanities, should be able to study such a course and, if hardship prevents this, to receive state assistance. But public money should not be spent on courses replicating what used to be inwork training or apprenticeships. Not long ago, even serious professions – solicitors, accountants and surveyors, for example – qualified by working for established firms. This should happen again. The state can set an example. Our nurses and police were well trained before someone decided the former needed degrees and the latter would benefit from them. Many civil service positions could be filled by people learning on the job.

Society will always need people who have learnt the skills of thought and analysis implicit in the rigorous education leading universities provide; but what those of less stature too often offer is essentially a confidence trick on the students and on the taxpayer.

Universities, existing as they do largely as a branch of the welfare state, draw their teachers predominantly from the Left, who inculcate their students with their own values. Proper reform would confront this systemic failure. Instead of complaining – as he recently has – that universities should admit more disadvantaged students, the Education Secretary should apply himself to ensuring a high-quality education for those who need it, and serious training programmes for those who do not. Then we really would offer our young people the start in life that is best for them.

Higher education institutions of less stature too often offer essentially a confidence trick on both students and the tax payer