European Affairs Committee
Tuesday 7th July 2026
Skip to latest contribution
This debate has concluded
(began 2 months, 3 weeks ago)
Watch LiveSkip to latest contribution
This debate has concluded
11:35
Speaker 1
-
Speaker 1
Through Erasmus. And yes, I'm a languages graduate, so I agree with you about the decline in languages, and in Turing. So I think I think we've got to sort of, you know, maximise the opportunities. But there is the money to pay for language preparation. And I think we've got to make sure that people know that. So it's like you can actually learn so that you don't have the crisis in the supermarket and you can read perhaps some of the labels.
And we didn't have that so much with Turing. So I think, again, it's a repositioning of the benefits of Erasmus participation.
And we didn't have that so much with Turing. So I think, again, it's a repositioning of the benefits of Erasmus participation.
11:36
Speaker 2
-
Speaker 2
I'd also add sort of two things. First of all, we have to work to maximise our participation in this programme. The budget will be bigger than Turing. So if you think about it from the opportunity point of view, the opportunity is bigger than the Turing opportunity. We could achieve a greater number of mobilities if we put our minds to it. We as an organisation, University UK has been working to build the kind of momentum prior to the opening of the the scheme in the in in.
In England, in the UK and we've been doing things to help those people who have never applied before to understand how it works and to learn from peers who've got previous experience. So I think the sector, working in partnership with government, with colleges, with schools, with sporting organisations, it's in our hands to try to build back this, um, this participation participation rate. The other thing I would say is that, um the increase in um opportunities to, you can, under the new programme, participate in shorter term mobilities.
And although there are some disadvantages compared to Turing relating to the requirement that there should, these should be credit bearing um but um many other European systems are also now offering teaching in English. So the landscape is changing for two reasons. Short term mobility is more teaching in English.
In England, in the UK and we've been doing things to help those people who have never applied before to understand how it works and to learn from peers who've got previous experience. So I think the sector, working in partnership with government, with colleges, with schools, with sporting organisations, it's in our hands to try to build back this, um, this participation participation rate. The other thing I would say is that, um the increase in um opportunities to, you can, under the new programme, participate in shorter term mobilities.
And although there are some disadvantages compared to Turing relating to the requirement that there should, these should be credit bearing um but um many other European systems are also now offering teaching in English. So the landscape is changing for two reasons. Short term mobility is more teaching in English.
11:37
11:37
11:38
11:38
11:38
11:38
11:38
11:38
11:38
Speaker 5
-
Speaker 5
Thank you for being here. Good to see you again. To a careful note to your plea that we think about the broader benefits of the scheme. However, I want to focus on one particular point on finance. Because you said quite. Quaintly at the beginning, the sort of pressures the university sector is under. So how are universities expecting Erasmus plus participation to impact on them financially?
11:39
Speaker 2
-
Speaker 2
So to be honest, I am worried about this. So if you think about what happens when um, universities participate in Erasmus exchanges, the, um the outbound student um pays just 15% of their fee. So and the inbound student doesn't pay a fee. So the seat is filled if you like, but the university receives just a fraction of the cost of the, the delivery. So combination of the fee and the uplift they would have got through the Strategic priorities grant. And I think that was always a barrier to institutional sort of uptake of Erasmus.
And that will have got more difficult for universities to justify in an era where, as you know, there are lots of universities making very significant cuts. So I do think that is a barrier to us making the best use of this programme. And I can tell you there was an earlier question. Lord Tugendhat asked about the sort of appetite, the interest, the interest is very strong, but I do worry that there will be a degree of rationing that goes on because of that cost problem.
And that will have got more difficult for universities to justify in an era where, as you know, there are lots of universities making very significant cuts. So I do think that is a barrier to us making the best use of this programme. And I can tell you there was an earlier question. Lord Tugendhat asked about the sort of appetite, the interest, the interest is very strong, but I do worry that there will be a degree of rationing that goes on because of that cost problem.
11:40
11:41
Speaker 4
-
Speaker 4
Well, I just wanted to follow up on that. Yes. Just before I ask the my follow up, other people have declared former interests. So I thought perhaps I should say I was chancellor of the University of Bath. I hadn't realised that former interests counted, as it were. Um, you've answered everything so far in terms of your UK responsibilities. Are there any differences in relation to Lord Barrow's point, but others as well, between English and Scottish universities?
11:41
Speaker 2
-
Speaker 2
It's a very good point actually. And the mobility rates vary quite a lot between different parts of the UK. So I think I'm right in saying perhaps we can write to the committee afterwards, but the mobility rate is highest in Northern Ireland and England. You know, the mobility rate is about half the Northern Irish rate. So there are sort of different. And maybe that's um that's partly about mobility to the Republic of Ireland, but Scotland does slightly better than than England.
Wales does slightly worse I think. And um so it will be, I think there will be an uneven distribution. And of course your point refers also to the fee arrangements in the four nations. So the um the. Scottish. The. Theposition that Scottish institutions will be in will be slightly different in terms of that financial flow in there and the 15% fee, um, if you like. Problem that will exist in England and Wales.
Wales does slightly worse I think. And um so it will be, I think there will be an uneven distribution. And of course your point refers also to the fee arrangements in the four nations. So the um the. Scottish. The. Theposition that Scottish institutions will be in will be slightly different in terms of that financial flow in there and the 15% fee, um, if you like. Problem that will exist in England and Wales.
11:43
11:43
11:43
Speaker 1
-
Speaker 1
Sure. I mean, I think there are a number of key measures. I think one of them we've touched on a lot, which is about the take up and the participation rates. But with that, also the diversification of participation. I think we had approximately 5000 sort of vocational learners and staff going every year when we were in Erasmus previously. And I think, as we've said, we want to see for all of the education sector and sport broader participation. So I think that's another measure.
Um, I think a third, which is more difficult to measure, but is perceptions, um of the scheme, I think that might be reflected in, in take up and another one that perhaps we've touched on less this morning is really the logistics of the scheme. Obviously last time we were in Erasmus we were part of freedom of movement. Um I think what we've also got to make sure is easy and straightforward for inbound and outbound is actually how we get people in and out of their countries for, for mobility.
So currently we have a list of exchange programmes that are on the government's authorised exchange scheme list. So we're waiting to see what will happen with Erasmus to make sure that those sort of inbound and outbound mobilities can flow very smoothly, because there are other changes as well. We've got the system coming in in the European Union. We've got the ETA, the electronic authorise electronic authorisation for travel. So there's a few logistical things that have changed. So I think we need to make sure that that's all in order.
And then I think really sort of long term tracking of the data as well. I think that's another advantage of being in Erasmus for the whole programme cycle. If we're able to re-associate for the next cycle, is to be able to see the data over a longer term.
Um, I think a third, which is more difficult to measure, but is perceptions, um of the scheme, I think that might be reflected in, in take up and another one that perhaps we've touched on less this morning is really the logistics of the scheme. Obviously last time we were in Erasmus we were part of freedom of movement. Um I think what we've also got to make sure is easy and straightforward for inbound and outbound is actually how we get people in and out of their countries for, for mobility.
So currently we have a list of exchange programmes that are on the government's authorised exchange scheme list. So we're waiting to see what will happen with Erasmus to make sure that those sort of inbound and outbound mobilities can flow very smoothly, because there are other changes as well. We've got the system coming in in the European Union. We've got the ETA, the electronic authorise electronic authorisation for travel. So there's a few logistical things that have changed. So I think we need to make sure that that's all in order.
And then I think really sort of long term tracking of the data as well. I think that's another advantage of being in Erasmus for the whole programme cycle. If we're able to re-associate for the next cycle, is to be able to see the data over a longer term.
11:45
Speaker 2
-
Speaker 2
I might start with the broader opportunities that Erasmus create. So I talked about horizon and the link between these two programmes. So for me, success would be strong participation by UK institutions across the full range of instruments in the programme. I'd like to be able to show that Erasmus and the staff mobility opportunities and the opportunity to participate in the European alliances, is ceding the kind of collaborative networks that lead to strong, successful. Horizon bids, and that there's this, you know, mutually reinforcing relationship between these two programmes.
And I think we'd like to see momentum. I think if we were here in three years time, it would be good to see that, okay, maybe we're not back to where we were in 2018, but we're on the road to achieving participation rates, which are, you know, as strong as they were and perhaps on an upward trajectory. And I'd like to see a recognition, um, from government and from opposition parties that this isn't just a niche issue affecting universities and students. This is actually part of our relationship with Europe.
And at a practical level, I think I'd like to see participation amongst students from the groups least likely to experience mobility being well represented in that cohort, I.
And I think we'd like to see momentum. I think if we were here in three years time, it would be good to see that, okay, maybe we're not back to where we were in 2018, but we're on the road to achieving participation rates, which are, you know, as strong as they were and perhaps on an upward trajectory. And I'd like to see a recognition, um, from government and from opposition parties that this isn't just a niche issue affecting universities and students. This is actually part of our relationship with Europe.
And at a practical level, I think I'd like to see participation amongst students from the groups least likely to experience mobility being well represented in that cohort, I.
11:46
11:46
Speaker 7
-
Speaker 7
It does. And thank you for that. And thank you both for coming. And we've already talked a little bit about, about, um, advantage versus disadvantaged students. In fact, the, um, the number of disadvantaged, the percentage of disadvantaged students taking advantage of the Turing scheme, according to Department of Education is 61%. Nearly two thirds of all students advantage. So that, that that's a very strong, um, uh, advantage for the Turing scheme. And I think there seems to be a general acceptance that the Erasmus scheme is a little bit more for, um, let's say, more advantaged.
And a lot of the pressure to have the Erasmus scheme is for, for those who, who are parents or whatever, who are not disadvantaged. But, but if we go on not just to whether that student is advantage or disadvantage, but to where they want to go, British Council says that the three most attractive countries for young people to go to Australia, the United States and Canada, um, of, of of 1830 year olds who left the UK in the UK, 9000 went to the EU, 17,000 to Australia and New Zealand, 13,000 went to North America.
So the preference of these young people is not to go to the EU. And I don't have any information about how many want to go to Turkey or Macedonia, just to cut off that bit about other countries participating. Um, but, but also the advantage to this country of what sort of education they'll get, none of the top 25 universities are in the EU, not one. 16 of them are in the United States. We've got four. Canada's got one.
What why would we want I mean, why would we want to shift to advantaged students rather than disadvantage?Why the shift, as we've heard, to have lots of EU students coming in here as opposed to our students going abroad?Um, why?Why wouldn't we want our students to go to where the better universities are not the worse. And, and if there's going to be more budget as, as we've discovered, there will be for this, why wouldn't it go in expanding the Turing scheme rather than this going on to the Erasmus scheme and getting rid of this apparently quite successful Turing scheme?
And a lot of the pressure to have the Erasmus scheme is for, for those who, who are parents or whatever, who are not disadvantaged. But, but if we go on not just to whether that student is advantage or disadvantage, but to where they want to go, British Council says that the three most attractive countries for young people to go to Australia, the United States and Canada, um, of, of of 1830 year olds who left the UK in the UK, 9000 went to the EU, 17,000 to Australia and New Zealand, 13,000 went to North America.
So the preference of these young people is not to go to the EU. And I don't have any information about how many want to go to Turkey or Macedonia, just to cut off that bit about other countries participating. Um, but, but also the advantage to this country of what sort of education they'll get, none of the top 25 universities are in the EU, not one. 16 of them are in the United States. We've got four. Canada's got one.
What why would we want I mean, why would we want to shift to advantaged students rather than disadvantage?Why the shift, as we've heard, to have lots of EU students coming in here as opposed to our students going abroad?Um, why?Why wouldn't we want our students to go to where the better universities are not the worse. And, and if there's going to be more budget as, as we've discovered, there will be for this, why wouldn't it go in expanding the Turing scheme rather than this going on to the Erasmus scheme and getting rid of this apparently quite successful Turing scheme?
11:48
11:48
Speaker 2
-
Speaker 2
I'm quite happy to start with. So first of all, Turing is designed to support students from the least advantaged groups. The bids that universities are asked to prepare to apply for funding, ask them to design programs that support widening participation. And that's good. There is a it is good, but there is a reason why the participation amongst students from the least advantaged backgrounds is what it is, and actually also means that there are probably lots of students who would have benefited individually and academically, and perhaps society would have benefited from them taking part in study, work or volunteering abroad who weren't able to do so.
Because the design of the scheme was as it was. And there is a budget for non-European mobility, 20% of the current programme is reserved for international credit mobility. We would like to press the commission to expand that envelope in the next programme, and I think that there would be others in the programme who would align behind that view. Um, I think that the other thing that I should mention is that quite a lot of current outbound mobility is supported either by students themselves, so there isn't any funding or, or, um, or structural support or by universities and a lot of that kind of international mobility.
And in the past, before Turing was created, and even now, whilst Turing exists, is still being institutionally funded or self-organised. So that will continue, I guess, from my point of view, especially given the financial pressures you'd like as much as possible of that to be funded through Erasmus. And little as possible to fall on the shoulders of the institutions or the individuals.
Because the design of the scheme was as it was. And there is a budget for non-European mobility, 20% of the current programme is reserved for international credit mobility. We would like to press the commission to expand that envelope in the next programme, and I think that there would be others in the programme who would align behind that view. Um, I think that the other thing that I should mention is that quite a lot of current outbound mobility is supported either by students themselves, so there isn't any funding or, or, um, or structural support or by universities and a lot of that kind of international mobility.
And in the past, before Turing was created, and even now, whilst Turing exists, is still being institutionally funded or self-organised. So that will continue, I guess, from my point of view, especially given the financial pressures you'd like as much as possible of that to be funded through Erasmus. And little as possible to fall on the shoulders of the institutions or the individuals.
11:49
11:50
Speaker 2
-
Speaker 2
I mean, look, my my view is that Erasmus, the way that Erasmus has evolved means that Erasmus now will be a little different from the way that it was when we were last in the programme. But I also think, um, this is what we make of it, you know, we, we have the opportunity to um, encourage students to take part in short mobility. Yes, there are credit barriers to doing that, but that's a significant difference in the new programme. We know that appeals to students from the least advantaged groups.
And we also know that short periods of mobility can be a gateway to a willingness to take part in longer mobilities. So institutionally supported very short placements a week, two weeks might encourage a greater proportion of students to put themselves forward for that slightly longer period of mobility. So part of that's going to be on us to make sure that we don't fall backwards. Under the new programme.
And we also know that short periods of mobility can be a gateway to a willingness to take part in longer mobilities. So institutionally supported very short placements a week, two weeks might encourage a greater proportion of students to put themselves forward for that slightly longer period of mobility. So part of that's going to be on us to make sure that we don't fall backwards. Under the new programme.
11:50
Speaker 1
-
Speaker 1
I mean, Erasmus Guide, the programme guide itself states when designing their projects and activities, organisations should have an inclusive approach, making them accessible to a diverse range of participants. So I think, you know, the the impetus is there to, to broaden the participation in Erasmus. And obviously it's a scheme that benefits universities and colleges and others from a college perspective, you know, we find it hugely beneficial to have the connections in Europe, for example, around adult education. At the AOC, we ran an adult project with our European Union partners through Erasmus.
And, you know, the committee may be familiar with the work that Alan Milburn is doing at the moment around needs. There's been a lot of talk about the Dutch education system in that and what they're doing with young people. So I think there is a huge amount that we can continue to learn from all international partners, but particularly closer to home in the EU. I.
And, you know, the committee may be familiar with the work that Alan Milburn is doing at the moment around needs. There's been a lot of talk about the Dutch education system in that and what they're doing with young people. So I think there is a huge amount that we can continue to learn from all international partners, but particularly closer to home in the EU. I.
11:51
Speaker 4
-
Speaker 4
Lord Grantchester. Thank you and welcome to both our witnesses today and for their interesting replies to our questions with maybe faded memories in the sector, how is Erasmus+ being mobilized by the government and the British Council?Is the outreach adequate?What are the key outstanding actions and areas of risk?Please.
11:52
Speaker 1
-
Speaker 1
So I think I mentioned that we have, um, stakeholder groups set up with the Department for education. Uh, we as an organisation, AOC, are working very closely with the British Council today. We actually have an information webinar on Erasmus opportunities with the British Council. They've mobilised very quickly through social media, developing their information to get that disseminated as as widely as possible. I think we've we've touched on some of the risks already. Um, I think a lot of them, again, to the promotion of the scheme, really reaching a wide range of organisations.
And I think combating perceptions that perhaps, you know, people might think Erasmus isn't for me. I think we need to be able to reach some of those people. Uh, for example, adult learners who might have barriers that Vivian outlined earlier caring responsibilities, employment, etc.. So I think there's still work to do for us to address some of those barriers, to make sure that the programme will be a success. And I think also to combat perceptions that we're just in it for one year.
We're not in it for the longer term as well. I think we need to sort of lay the groundwork for us to be in the scheme with a view to it being a longer term participation.
And I think combating perceptions that perhaps, you know, people might think Erasmus isn't for me. I think we need to be able to reach some of those people. Uh, for example, adult learners who might have barriers that Vivian outlined earlier caring responsibilities, employment, etc.. So I think there's still work to do for us to address some of those barriers, to make sure that the programme will be a success. And I think also to combat perceptions that we're just in it for one year.
We're not in it for the longer term as well. I think we need to sort of lay the groundwork for us to be in the scheme with a view to it being a longer term participation.
11:53
Speaker 2
-
Speaker 2
And from our point of view, universities we've been hosting webinars, peer support sessions. So you can get those people who have had previous experience of participating in the scheme, sharing that with colleagues who are newer to the sector. Uh, we've been, uh, we've got a FAQ resource, which we keep expanding depending on the things that our members say they need from us. There are 1 to 1 advice, uh, 1 to 1 advice is being provided. We're sharing best practice and we've had a long standing network of the people in universities who coordinate outward student mobility.
That's a very, very active network that's existed for probably 15 years. And we're bringing that network together regularly to make sure that they know what's going on. They know all the key dates, they know how to apply, and they've got access to advice. And there are some risks. I think the biggest risk is about the compressed implementation time scale. And we also really need to avoid delays in decision making, um, on those individual applications that universities have now, um, submitted.
And I think, as Emma said, early confirmation that this isn't just a one year opportunity, but this is worth putting the institutional resource into building up because we'll be in the next programme to, I think the earlier we can get a sense of that being a priority, the better.
That's a very, very active network that's existed for probably 15 years. And we're bringing that network together regularly to make sure that they know what's going on. They know all the key dates, they know how to apply, and they've got access to advice. And there are some risks. I think the biggest risk is about the compressed implementation time scale. And we also really need to avoid delays in decision making, um, on those individual applications that universities have now, um, submitted.
And I think, as Emma said, early confirmation that this isn't just a one year opportunity, but this is worth putting the institutional resource into building up because we'll be in the next programme to, I think the earlier we can get a sense of that being a priority, the better.
11:54
11:54
11:54
11:55
Speaker 1
-
Speaker 1
and I think for institutions that are new to Erasmus or haven't engaged for a while, um, there's also the need to help them find the partnerships as well in the European Union. So again, that's something that we're looking to support them with so they can make lasting partnerships because some of the partnerships, certainly in the college sector, dropped off during Turing because it became very difficult to come into the UK to do an unpaid work placement, given the parameters of our visa and immigration system.
11:55
11:55
11:55
11:55
11:55
Speaker 2
-
Speaker 2
This question, but what do you think the government should be?Um, seeking to. Achieve in the negotiations for the 2028 to 34 period?Because obviously that sort of coincides with the EU's multiannual financial framework. And so this is the opportunity for us to get in at the first stage of the negotiations. But to what extent, maybe should we be thinking about short term mobilities and the sort of opportunities that would then allow us to be focusing on widening participation applicants rather than necessarily the more the more privileged who would probably find ways of doing exchanges anyway?Yeah.
I mean, we've got a position paper on the next programme which we can share with the committee, the committee, but um, our, our priorities in relation to that. Um next programme, including that sort of greater flexibility around short term and non-credit bearing mobility. And just to expand on that, the issue is that you can undertake short term mobilities under the new programme, but we think it would be easier to do that if there wasn't a requirement that that should be credit bearing because credit bearing short term abilities is a great big faff.
So having some flexibility about that would be really helpful. Um, I think we've talked about wanting to expand the envelope for global mobility. Um, and of course, that really isn't just about student mobility. That's about the institution to institution cooperation to, um, I've mentioned the European universities, the university alliances, which are in a sense one of the very, very big ideas that Europe, the Commission has and the member States have generated in the last, um, five years or so. And the UK has been a bit marginal, marginal to that huge new initiative.
We do have universities participating in some of those networks. I think um there are 14 UK universities who are already part of European university alliances. Um, but we would like there to be opportunities to, in a sense pump prime, um the stronger participation of UK universities given they missed out on earlier stages. Um I think the other thing, which it would be particularly helpful if this committee could draw attention to is the potential that countries of the type of the UK who were previously fully associated, um, but were out of the programme, should not be able to access partial association.
And that seems a restriction which is designed to prevent the UK from choosing a partial association route that would be available to some other countries. And we don't think that's right. And we can see why the Commission might want to, you know, brings back memories of cherry picking, does it not?But, um, but I think we should have the same rights as any other country to at least negotiate on the basis that perhaps partial association would be preferable. Um, and there are some other details around the clarity of funding for the new scholarships for excellence Fund.
I mean, we've got a position paper on the next programme which we can share with the committee, the committee, but um, our, our priorities in relation to that. Um next programme, including that sort of greater flexibility around short term and non-credit bearing mobility. And just to expand on that, the issue is that you can undertake short term mobilities under the new programme, but we think it would be easier to do that if there wasn't a requirement that that should be credit bearing because credit bearing short term abilities is a great big faff.
So having some flexibility about that would be really helpful. Um, I think we've talked about wanting to expand the envelope for global mobility. Um, and of course, that really isn't just about student mobility. That's about the institution to institution cooperation to, um, I've mentioned the European universities, the university alliances, which are in a sense one of the very, very big ideas that Europe, the Commission has and the member States have generated in the last, um, five years or so. And the UK has been a bit marginal, marginal to that huge new initiative.
We do have universities participating in some of those networks. I think um there are 14 UK universities who are already part of European university alliances. Um, but we would like there to be opportunities to, in a sense pump prime, um the stronger participation of UK universities given they missed out on earlier stages. Um I think the other thing, which it would be particularly helpful if this committee could draw attention to is the potential that countries of the type of the UK who were previously fully associated, um, but were out of the programme, should not be able to access partial association.
And that seems a restriction which is designed to prevent the UK from choosing a partial association route that would be available to some other countries. And we don't think that's right. And we can see why the Commission might want to, you know, brings back memories of cherry picking, does it not?But, um, but I think we should have the same rights as any other country to at least negotiate on the basis that perhaps partial association would be preferable. Um, and there are some other details around the clarity of funding for the new scholarships for excellence Fund.
11:58
Speaker 1
-
Speaker 1
I think Vivian has covered a lot of the detail, I think from the vocational perspective, I think we'd want to see continued high profile, um, for vocational education and adult education within Erasmus as one of its, its features. And again, that breadth of opportunity. And I think we would also want to see again, we've, we've touched on this, but that we are locked in for the duration of the next cycle. I think we need that to help build institutional partnerships, to build on the awareness, um, and to build up the engagement.
11:58
11:59
Speaker 8
-
Speaker 8
Um, well, first of all, thank you for coming today. It's been a fascinating discussion. Um, this bill to some extent on on Lord Barrow's question, your conversation with him. Uh, it's for stern. You talked about how university budgets are being squeezed at the moment, and media reports have suggested that one of the key EU requests in the current ongoing negotiations on the Youth Experience Scheme is home fee status for EU students studying in British universities. What's your response to this and can you give us an estimate, perhaps, of the potential financial hit to UK universities from this?
11:59
Speaker 2
-
Speaker 2
So this is a long standing issue. I think the UK government's position was that, um this was not part of the uh, terms of the negotiations that are currently taking place. And I think there was previously a pretty firm view that it shouldn't be introduced as a topic late in the day. Um, from our point of view, um, I think it's widely understood that for most universities and most courses, the combination of the domestic fee in England and Wales, the arrangements in Northern Ireland are different.
And we've got a whole different issue about home fee status in relation to Scottish students, which I'll return to doesn't cover the cost of delivery. And I should probably stop talking about vets, but it it, it costs you about £30,000 to train a vet and you get £9,500 from the domestic tuition fee. You get a top up through the Strategic Priorities grant, which gets cut and cut and cut. We've lost about 30% of its value in the last decade. Um, and the rest of it, it's up to the institution to find ways to cover the gap.
It's intolerable, allowed a situation to emerge where the costs of delivery and the regulated fee plus t grant just don't meet in the middle. And, and that makes it very difficult to, see how um, according home. Um fee status to EU students would do anything other than making a very significant problem in the UK in, in the English system. I'm just going to talk about England for now. Worse, if you're in Scotland, it's a more alarming proposition because, uh, if you were given a domestic fee status and that meant that you didn't pay any fees, then there would simply be no contribution towards the cost of study.
So I think our view has been that the government's right to push back on this topic. I should say there's a difference of views in our membership. Um, there are some some of our members think this is a better thing than others, but broadly speaking, my sense and we have discussed it again recently at the UK board, is that we, under the current circumstances, with the financial pressures on the system, this would just make a very difficult situation worse. And the government should therefore not do it.
And we've got a whole different issue about home fee status in relation to Scottish students, which I'll return to doesn't cover the cost of delivery. And I should probably stop talking about vets, but it it, it costs you about £30,000 to train a vet and you get £9,500 from the domestic tuition fee. You get a top up through the Strategic Priorities grant, which gets cut and cut and cut. We've lost about 30% of its value in the last decade. Um, and the rest of it, it's up to the institution to find ways to cover the gap.
It's intolerable, allowed a situation to emerge where the costs of delivery and the regulated fee plus t grant just don't meet in the middle. And, and that makes it very difficult to, see how um, according home. Um fee status to EU students would do anything other than making a very significant problem in the UK in, in the English system. I'm just going to talk about England for now. Worse, if you're in Scotland, it's a more alarming proposition because, uh, if you were given a domestic fee status and that meant that you didn't pay any fees, then there would simply be no contribution towards the cost of study.
So I think our view has been that the government's right to push back on this topic. I should say there's a difference of views in our membership. Um, there are some some of our members think this is a better thing than others, but broadly speaking, my sense and we have discussed it again recently at the UK board, is that we, under the current circumstances, with the financial pressures on the system, this would just make a very difficult situation worse. And the government should therefore not do it.
12:01
12:02
Speaker 2
-
Speaker 2
So the Russell Group has produced an estimate that the cost of Russell Group institutions would be in the order of 580 million a year. Um it would differ. I mean, Russell Group institutions are not the only high tariff high selective, highly selective, and therefore also, um higher fee institutions. Um, but generally speaking, institutions, which are the more research intensive end of the spectrum would charge higher fees and would have higher costs of delivery in some respects because they've got kit and equipment and research, active staff to maintain.
And so there would be a different picture in other institutions, which I think explains why some universities, for example, the University Alliance, would say that they're in favour of a concession here.
And so there would be a different picture in other institutions, which I think explains why some universities, for example, the University Alliance, would say that they're in favour of a concession here.
12:02
12:02
Speaker 2
-
Speaker 2
Yeah, it is. It is a much wider problem that needs serious attention. And I might, if I may, just abuse the opportunity to say, look, this this is something that the, um, the government needs to take a holistic view of. I think that we have fragmented university policy making the Home Office doing one thing, you know, doing it, trying to do another. I think the, um, you know, the, the absence of an oversight over the interconnected policy decisions that each one combined with the others creates a what's becoming an increasingly unsustainable position.
I was speaking to one vice chancellor this morning who said on this home fee question the consequence would be I would reduce the number of domestic students, I admitted, so you would end up constraining opportunity for UK students as a result of making this concession. Now, I don't know how widespread that would be. It's one conversation with one vice chancellor happened to be in this building this morning, but I think we ought to take it seriously.
I was speaking to one vice chancellor this morning who said on this home fee question the consequence would be I would reduce the number of domestic students, I admitted, so you would end up constraining opportunity for UK students as a result of making this concession. Now, I don't know how widespread that would be. It's one conversation with one vice chancellor happened to be in this building this morning, but I think we ought to take it seriously.
12:04
Speaker 4
-
Speaker 4
Well, we've run over just slightly, but I've got three issues which seem to me have emerged, which I just would like your very brief comment on. And the first is that although, as you say, you perhaps can't assess either touring or Erasmus Plus on purely money out money in grounds that there are much wider. Nevertheless, the government is going to have to make a judgement on value for money. Um, depending upon the wider benefits of the scheme, but also what the bill is going to be.
And of course, it was the size of the bill that caused us to withdraw from Erasmus in the first place. So, um, you know, that is I think you would agree still a fundamental issue, particularly if, as you say, the financial implications for universities in particular are going to lessen the appetite for participation. Um, the second just a comment really. When you're talking about the incentives for our people to participate outgoing. Um, my sense is that probably the greatest worry of undergraduates across the country is they won't be able to get a job when they graduate.
You said that there is clear evidence that people who participate in this scheme have increased opportunities of getting a job. I would have thought that's pretty big incentive for anybody if it's put to them in that way. And the third thing is, I was going to ask whether, um, designing in to Erasmus plus a requirement as exists under Turing for a certain percentage, say of disadvantages or whatever is in our hands. But from what I understood, you said to an earlier question that isn't so and that that's something we were going that we would have to negotiate.
You did mention your position paper, which I think would be very pleased to see if we could. But again, going back to the point you made about this being such an attractive place for overseas students, I mean, surely if we do it, if we're clever enough in these negotiations, we've got more than enough cards in our hands to get the right result for the UK.
And of course, it was the size of the bill that caused us to withdraw from Erasmus in the first place. So, um, you know, that is I think you would agree still a fundamental issue, particularly if, as you say, the financial implications for universities in particular are going to lessen the appetite for participation. Um, the second just a comment really. When you're talking about the incentives for our people to participate outgoing. Um, my sense is that probably the greatest worry of undergraduates across the country is they won't be able to get a job when they graduate.
You said that there is clear evidence that people who participate in this scheme have increased opportunities of getting a job. I would have thought that's pretty big incentive for anybody if it's put to them in that way. And the third thing is, I was going to ask whether, um, designing in to Erasmus plus a requirement as exists under Turing for a certain percentage, say of disadvantages or whatever is in our hands. But from what I understood, you said to an earlier question that isn't so and that that's something we were going that we would have to negotiate.
You did mention your position paper, which I think would be very pleased to see if we could. But again, going back to the point you made about this being such an attractive place for overseas students, I mean, surely if we do it, if we're clever enough in these negotiations, we've got more than enough cards in our hands to get the right result for the UK.
12:05
Speaker 2
-
Speaker 2
Content in our hands. Point is a very good one. So I think there are features of the Erasmus programme, which in the next iteration could be improved to help us do the job. That is fundamentally our job, which is to boost participation from low participation from students, from low participation backgrounds. I think the pressure is on the UK system to encourage uptake amongst a more diverse group of students, and Erasmus can help us more, but the opportunity is still there to do that.
I'd also say we're going to spend a lot of money on this programme. We should make sure we don't under-invest in the promotion of it. I think that's partly a job for the national agency, but it's partly a job for government and for the university and college and other sectors. I think we need to, um, really. Champion the opportunity that it provides. And on your point about employability, yes, there's a direct correlation between those people who've had an experience of mobility and employment outcomes.
But 20% of Erasmus Mobility, I think was also for the purposes of work, you can go using Erasmus Mobility to work. So I think that that's also something that we can lean in.
I'd also say we're going to spend a lot of money on this programme. We should make sure we don't under-invest in the promotion of it. I think that's partly a job for the national agency, but it's partly a job for government and for the university and college and other sectors. I think we need to, um, really. Champion the opportunity that it provides. And on your point about employability, yes, there's a direct correlation between those people who've had an experience of mobility and employment outcomes.
But 20% of Erasmus Mobility, I think was also for the purposes of work, you can go using Erasmus Mobility to work. So I think that that's also something that we can lean in.
12:07
12:07
Speaker 1
-
Speaker 1
No, I think I mean, I think Vivian's covered all of the main points. I think we know the benefits of Erasmus very similar to Turing in the sense of employability skills, technical academic skills, but also personal skills, independence, confidence, all of those kind of non-measurable skills. Actually, in some senses come out of Erasmus and Turing and the mobility opportunities. So I think it's it's a hard argument to argue against.