Bullet dodged for higher education; but what questions do we need to answer to make sure we aren’t in the firing line again?

Those with an eye on higher education policy will know that the last couple of months have been really nervy, and potential changes around policy impacting international students has been very precariously balanced.

Months of collective lobbying from all corners of the industry ended with a “favourable” Migration Advisory Committee (MAC) review, and then a relatively quiet announcement from the Home Secretary the day after a general election was called.?

The fundamental argument “that did it” was universities need funding - right now, international students are the best way to do that.

The fact that international students cross-subsidise the teaching of British students, and our research, is something that has been accepted for a few years. As many seeing this may know, the cold combination of inflationary pressures that universities are not immune to, the home fee being fixed at a figure of ￡9,250 that is increasingly insufficient, and the years that the UK spent outside of the Horizon scheme meaning limited sources of research income has meant that international fees are more and more important.?

So, surely it is a no-brainer that international students, and their fee income, should be welcomed with open arms? Well, no. The worst case scenario for the sector would (probably) have been universities closing, or at least merging. This obviously wasn’t seen as that bad by the government.?

The sector more broadly has failed to grapple with some uncomfortable questions, which need answering. Sometimes, when you ask questions smart people think about them, so that’s what I’m going to do.?Strap in!

1. Why was the rumour about “international students taking places of British students” able to break through???

If there is a basis of truth to this, I haven’t seen it. I think the question is more about how we have got to a point where people want to believe/weaponise this rhetoric.

2. How do we articulate the value and impact of higher education in a world that is “tired of experts”??

I think we need to move away from “telling” people how great universities are, and towards “showing” them. This will mean having conversations in spaces that universities don’t traditionally go to - seeing sector leaders on GB News over the last few weeks is an important step for us. Breaking the echo chamber, with a united voice, is huge.

3. Why have we stopped challenging the migration statistics’ inclusion of international students??

I understand the need for international comparisons, and the “smoke and mirrors” that this may create if it appears that there is an attempt to “remove” international students from figures. What I think is a more persuasive argument is to create a way of counting migration that divides migrants into temporary and permanent, or tries to introduce a level of nuance to the migration debate that doesn’t exist.

4. Can we ensure that we still have the reflection that a negative MAC review, or government response to MAC, would have initiated?

Had the Graduate Route visa been removed or hampered, as a sector we would have faced some tough questions about how students are recruited. We all stood behind the Agent Quality Framework when it was a shield for our sector - now we need to ensure its values are put into practice across the land.

5. How can the collaboration that we have seen across our sector over the last few months become closer to business as usual??

Debate is at the heart of what we do - but surely there are issues we can get behind as a sector consistently, like “funding universities is good”.

6. How can we better socialise how bad it would be for a university to close, or universities to merge??

We know that universities are often a region’s biggest employer. We know that universities can be a key contributor to social mobility. We know that universities can play a huge part in a region’s identity and production. How do we present these things as being so good that they can’t be risked?

The feedback that I am receiving from key markets is that the UK position is more encouraging than competitor destinations. This is great news for our funding issues, and for the UK’s ability to attract international students. What it also means is that it is likely that international student numbers may rise again (though ‘dependent visas’ won’t), and therefore it won’t be long before questions of the importance of international students are asked again.?

Whilst the UK was hunkered down in the MAC response, patting ourselves on the back for a job well done, the Labor government in Australia announced a broad outline for international student policy going forward. The headline that I’ve been able to gather (and I’ll happily take feedback from colleagues more in the know) is that in order to grow international student numbers, universities/local authorities will need to ensure that there is purpose built student housing available.?

It doesn’t seem too outrageous to suspect that a new Labour government (if elected) would run with the recommendations from MAC, and end up somewhere close to the position that Labor (Australia) are landing on. If and when those debates happen, are we ready for those questions again?