Business Secretary Vince Cable has announced the coalition’s plans to allow universities free reign over tuition fees. Although the Liberal Democrat party, of whom Cable is a member, had made a key election pledge to prevent the increase in tuition fees for British students, the coalition is in danger of neglecting its promises in a surprisingly ill thought out proposal to help the government cut 80% of its education funding.

Whilst no student or future student wants to be saddled with the prospect of crippling debt at the age of 18, very few alternative suggestions have been presented directly to Vince Cable and the cabinet.

Here are a few:

•Take a closer look at school funding. If I remember correctly, my own secondary school had a modern foyer and reception, plasma screen televisions in the corridors, interactive whiteboards…and textbooks from the 70s. Head teachers and Principals need to have their spending closely monitored; Parent Teacher Associations (PTAs) could be made responsible that the school is fully functional from the ground up. This could also be applied to the newest Academy Schools

•Schools in ‘Special Measures’ can still go on to nurture fantastic students. The nature and criteria of ‘Special Measures’ needs to be made clear to parents and the public to ensure that schools are not attempting to cheat the system by applying for more funding than they should
•Viable alternatives to university need to be created. It should no longer be held that unless one is educated at university, one is not educated at all. Each year around the time of A Level examinations and results, numerous adverts depicting the advantages of apprenticeships, work experience and diplomas are televised, but they do not seem to really exist. This needs to be addressed

•Quality, not quantity. University should no longer be portrayed as just a ‘rite of passage’ – Sixth Form and College students are adults, and must show their commitment to their studies should they wish to gain university places. The bottom 10% of British universities are still underperforming as they had done when they were polytechnics, draining resources and acting as a ‘mop’ for young people. Their degrees could be converted to college diplomas, and the UK’s position in International league tables would be increased

•Demand funding from Scottish students. As someone with Scottish blood, even I can see the unfairness of British taxes funding the Scottish education system with no monetary return. This would take an incredible amount of pressure off of students from the rest of the British Isle

•Regulate ‘philanthropy’. After the government’s calls for private funding for the Arts sector (a system that thrives in America), the same could be applied to Education in the short term. The bitterness that the country still feels towards those who perpetuated the banking crisis should be fairly addressed, and high-income sectors such as banking could become representatives or ambassadors of selected institutions without the need for privatisation

I hope that these points illustrate the fact that alternatives do exist; they need to be hammered out by a committee of university representatives from across Britain and made publicly accessible.

We are concerned about the future of the British train building industry.

Our concern is a consequence of the decision to appoint Siemens as the preferred bidder for the new fleet of trains for the Thameslink Programme. This will result in 1,400 jobs being lost in Derby and up to another 20,000 in the UK, as suppliers are also affected.

Politicians from all the parties including Conservative MPs, businesses and the unions are calling for the contract to be reviewed.

Independent experts argue that the if the sums are done correctly, awarding the contract to Siemens can't possibly offer value for money to the British taxpayer as 20m a year will be lost in income tax, a sum that has not been factored into the government's decision. Alternatively, awarding the contract to Derby will increase tax receipts by as estimated 100m a year. We are calling on the Government to revoke the preferred bidder status and ensure that there is a vibrant train building manufacturing industry in the UK at Derby in order that railways play a big part in transport planning.

"Legal" tax dodging seems to be the reserve of the rich but the government, to my mind, appears reluctant to do anything about them. At the same time they insist, with regard to the national deficit, that "we're all in this together".

It seems logical that if the government will not curb tax avoidance then the only fair alternative would be to make tax havens available to all of us.

Perhaps a good focus for the campaign would be to allow ordinary people to pool their finances together to meet the minimum investment required to exploit a tax haven, or providing legal aid to set up trust funds.

A campaign centred on this would be a wonderfully satirical way of calling for an equal and fairer society; either forcing the government to act, or to admit the double-standard inherent in current tax law.

An EU-based company importing electronic components from outside of the EU has to pay duty on those components (most are made in the Far East). If, however, a device is manufactured outside the EU from those same components, then imported into the EU, it does not attract import duty. A company manufacturing abroad, and depriving the EU economies of employment opportunities, effectively gets a tax break over those supporting the EU economies. This makes it very tax inefficient for any electronics company to manufacture in the EU, and is a contributing factor in the loss of so many manufacturing jobs to overseas economies. Campaign for the adjustment the EU import duty rules to remove this disparity and to encourage the return of electronics manufacture and assembly jobs to the EU and Britain.

Related e-petition: http://epetitions.direct.gov.uk/petitions/27158

More info on the Common Customs Tariff (CCF): http://www.sloanefox.freeserve.co.uk/taric.htm

"The banking system, and all its marvels, has been stood on its head. It is riddled with bad debt and has become a borrowing machine, not a lending machine. This is the economics of a lunatic asylum."

From a recent new economics foundation report titled "Where did our money go? which makes it clear that the banking and finance systems are not fit for purpose.
http://www.neweconomics.org/publications/where-did-our-money-go
Extracts: http://www.mediafire.com/?47u9sj63ovyizbk

Governments of all colours refuse to tackle this fundamental issue, and the vast majority of NGOs have their heads in the sand about it, despite the fact that failing to address the problem severely limits social progress and actively damages the environment.

It could be argued that without reforming the financial and banking systems all efforts for social and environmental justice amount to little more than pissing in the wind.

In which case, we need to educate ourselves about what's happening and campaign for radical reform.

Good places to start: http://www.neweconomics.org and http://www.jamesrobertson.com