"Education for the Masses": Edinburgh Students March Against Cuts

Today I participated in a demonstration in Edinburgh with hundreds of students against the cuts to higher education funding currently being proposed by the Con-Dem government in Westminster. This was part of a wave of student action today across Scotland, from Aberdeen to Glasgow, against attacks to higher education. This article reports the march, before giving my own analysis of the wider strategies and  issues at stake and why I think defending and extending free higher education provision is so important for all of us.

“No If’s, No But’s, No Education Cuts!”

The march saw the involvement of the Edinburgh Uni Anti-Cuts Coalition, Edinburgh University Students Association, Napier University Students Association, and the National Union of Students (NUS) . The marchers assembled in Bristo Square (where coffee and tea was being provided, for which I have  great respect for the organisers), before heading down Forrest Road, the Royal Mile, and finishing outside the Scottish parliament. The chanting mainly focused on the betrayal of the Lib Dem’s promise to block the rise in tuition fees (they will now likely assist the bill for higher tuition fees through parliament tomorrow), and the need to fight against cuts to education: “Nick Clegg, we know you, you’re a fucking Tory too” and “ they say cut back, we say fight back”. Less prominent was the chanting of “workers and students, unite and fight” and “Con Dems, get out, we know what you’re all about: job cuts, job losses, more money for the bosses”. The police also carefully controlled the march, likely hoping to avoid the sit-downs which brought traffic to a halt on previous student protests in Edinburgh.

Outside the parliament, we heard from Liz Rawlings, EUSA (Edinburgh University Students Association), Robin Harper MSP, (Green Party & former rector of Edinburgh University), Sarah Boyak MSP (Labour), Mike Pringle MSP (Liberal Democrat opposed to tuition fees rise)  and Liam Burns (NUS), and a UCU representative (University and College Union). The general tone was as follows: hold Lib Dem MP’s to account over their broken promises, lobby them with thousands of letters and force them to listen, and also focus pressure on prospective Scottish MSP’s to stop them introducing fees in Scotland after the next parliamentary election. Robin Harper also drew the link between bankers causing the economic crisis through excessive financial speculation and students being made to pay the price through higher fees and government funding cuts. Rather, he argued we should more rationaly organise the economy and save money through cutting Trident.

After the speeches, the march was announced over. However, there is another rally meeting outside the Scottish parliament tomorrow at 4.30pm to continue to raise demands over fighting cuts to education.

Analysis: A Strategy To Win?

The march was positive in that hundreds of students in Edinburgh have been drawn into the struggle against cuts to higher education, and they were given a voice on the march and continue to build momentum. Also, I found many of the placards and banners inventive, amusing, and to the point. However, I do question the strategy outlined by the speakers at the end of the march as a means of defending higher education. The rational seems to be that mass letters, numbers on the streets, and lobbying of MP’s and MSP’s will be enough to prevent cuts to education and the increase/introduction of tuition fees. However, the conduct of many Labour MP’s over Iraq, and both the Lib Dem’s presently and Labour previously over the issue of fees, demonstrate how once the limited democratic input of an election has passed, “representatives” can ignore lobbying and represent other interests (party whips, business, or other) without too much trouble: after all, it is years before they will have to risk losing their post in another election, and in politics four or five years is a long time.

Rather, I believe the incessant focus on lobbying MP’s with letters and peaceful, ‘responsible’ demonstrations is an ultimately unrealistic and potentially de-mobilising strategy for defeating cuts. Where do we go once our “representatives” ignore such protests and pass laws detrimental to our interests and views of education? The answer, I feel, has been shown by far more militant student anti-cuts organisations in London.* They are not only protesting against cuts to education, but against all cuts. They are linking with campus based unions such as UCU and Unison, and joining in fights with other unions and community campaigns against local councils who have already started passing brutal cuts budgets. They are holding demonstrations designed to cause maximum disruption and force the political classes to listen to their demands. I believe  they are engaging in the wider task of building a united social movement of students, young people, pensioners, trade unions and community campaigns, the like of which has not been seen in this country since the poll tax rebellion twenty years ago.

Of course, many of these trends are present within the Edinburgh movement against cuts to higher education. My point here is that these trends need to be encouraged and begin to set the agenda on how the student anti-cuts movement in this city is organised and sets its goals and demands. At the march today, the most prominent chants and speeches did not represent the militant, united and autonomous strategy which will be necessary to build a mass movement capable of defeating the government’s cuts agenda. For this current to emerge, it is important to have a clear understanding of both what government plans will mean for higher education in terms of jobs, courses, and places, and along with defending these, articulating why winning the battle against cuts is so important for all of us.

The issue: “Education for the masses, not just for the ruling classes!”

So what is at stake here, and what are the wider issues? The planned cuts to higher education by the Con-Dem government include proposing to raise tuition fees in English universities to £9,000 per year, a move which will add pressure to the Scottish funding system and strengthen the hand of those who want to introduce tuition fees here. Also at stake is cutting university teaching budgets, arts and humanities research funding, and scrapping the Educational Maintenance Allowance for older teenangers from low-income backgrounds.

Those arguing against these moves have argued that forcing students to pay more for education will discourage those from lower income backgrounds from going to university, creating a more elitist system based on ability to pay, not ability to study. Also, as the ‘elite’ universities begin to charge higher fees than the rest, a two-tier higher education system is likely to be created whereby only the rich can afford to attend the top institutions. Meanwhile, cutting research and teaching funding will hammer higher education in general, with mass job losses (as the University and College Union, UCU, has shown here), courses cut, and available university places falling: again with the likelihood that it is the poor who will be squeezed out of the university system.

“You can shove your private uni’s up your arse!”

The wider issue at stake here is what role education should play in our society. Behind the Con-Dem’s proposals is a capitalist view of education as a private commodity: based on ability to purchase, and obtained for the self-benefit of the consumer as measured by how high a salary they can obtain based on what education they can afford to buy. Therefore education and research are meant to provide the means for individuals to gain a high income, and companies to make a profit: through the production of graduates with the required skills and training, and new technologies to increase efficiency and create new products. This is also why sciences and engineering funding is being protected while arts and humanities funding is being hammered.

For those who defend ‘free’ education available to all, a generally socialist or welfarist position is normally taken: education as a social right, not a private privilege. Education, rather than being primarily a means to a job, is central to our development as people and our ability to realise our full potential: as musicians, poets, scientists, teachers, thinkers, doctors, lawyers, economists, skilled tradespersons, or any other future we may wish to pursue. Along with education being key to our development, this right should be available to all: your right to learn a particular skill or study an area of knowledge should not be at the expense of my ability to develop myself. This is where I stand in the debate over the place of education in society and why education should  be provided to all with no barriers based on ability to pay: we are all different, but all of equal worth, and I’d much rather live in a humanly rich and diverse society where everyone has the equality of opportunity to develop themselves as people, rather than one where the full development of the few comes at the expense of the hopes, dreams and potential of the many.

Indeed, it is because of such views that I identify myself as a socialist and reject capitalism as a model of human development, or as a desirable way of organising society. This also leads me to conclude that if we are to win this fight against cuts, we need to develop a socialist alternative and begin to realise that it is a crisis in capitalism that is at the root of our current economic crisis and which provides the impetus for the cuts to public spending, an issue not addressed by any of the main parties. Thus, twinned with building a movement to fight against cuts, we need to continue to build a socialist movement; one that is democratic, participatory, and puts an emphasis on full human development and maximal educational opportunity for all.

*Over the next few days I will be publishing my article on the student anti-cuts orgnisation of Goldsmiths University London, including interviews with some of those involved, which I feel help point the way to what kind of strategy and demands are needed in order to build a social movement that will be capable of defeating the austerity agenda of this Con-Dem government. All articles I write will also be available on my blog.