The looming vote on tuition fees is wreaking such havoc on the Liberal Democrats that, even with their relatively small band of MPs, their vote may split four ways. I make that hung, drawn and now officially quartered within seven months of the coalition. Not bad going.          

We have been invited to believe that this splintering of the party vote is a reason for ridicule, a laughing stock scenario that we should all find terribly amusing. Or unamusingly terrible if you haven’t yet been to university.

For me, that ridiculous scenario would have been the mass abstention that was mooted last week and correctly booted into the long grass. How ridiculous would it have been for each Lib Dem MP to not take a position on a tripling of fees? Now, on the contrary, each Lib Dem MP will be scrutinising the proposals in the minutest of detail, drawing their own conclusions and voting accordingly in the full glare of their constituents. Democracy in action and a far cry from the heavily whipped voting that we have known and resented for much of the past decade. What, after all, were we all hoping ‘new politics’ to be with such a large deficit to deal with?

The perfect example of how constrained, kettled even, we have become in our parliamentary expectations is the euphoric joy that was felt in Scotland when Malcolm Chisholm, a single MSP, decided to back the SNP’s proposal of minimum pricing. For a beautiful Holyrood moment, the merits of a motion weren’t seen through the prism of red, yellow, orange or blue but for what a policy was and for what it could do.      

Now, the Liberal Democrats had a pledge at the last election and nothing can change that fact, as many of their MPs, including Goverment members, recognise and can’t reconcile. Indeed, Nick Clegg’s positively pious promise of a new politics so quickly followed by a broken pledge has put paid to his chances of being taken seriously in the near future but, if one was to look past that, then an appealing picture may yet emerge. Why shouldn’t the media allow a party to see a policy from different angles while drawing several conclusions?

I do enjoy the irony of opinion splitting four ways within a party that wants to maintain the three-party cosy consensus through AV but I don’t think any whipped party whose MPs all trot out to vote precisely the same way should criticise too sharply. Labour has been conspicuous in its absence throughout much of this debate, save for the NUS of course.

There is some sort of joyous democracy belying the supposedly shambolic disarray of the Liberal Democrats and if this is what it takes for MPs rather than party whips to hold parliamentary power then maybe a bit of cross-party respect for the Lib Dem rebels, and even those voting in favour, is in order.   

So this is the new politics that Nick Clegg promised then? Vince Cable unable to support a policy that he not only helped to prepare but has sitting squarely within his Ministerial remit and the Deputy Prime Minister regretting signing pledges in the same year that he put pen to paper.

It is not only the Liberal Democrat side of the debate that is falling to pieces though. Yesterday marked the third day of action from students, students who appear to be getting younger and younger not to mention fewer and fewer and if a protest doesn’t have momentum then it doesn’t have much. Don’t get me wrong, I am in favour of the protests if they are saying that fees should be paid through general taxation to ensure fairness is guaranteed. However, that message has weakened in concentration, is struggling from a lack of political leadership and is getting lost in the sound and fury of scattershot protests from scatterbrained students.

The declining numbers are getting noisier but they seem to be losing the clarity of their argument. What is the point of students ‘occupying’ university buildings? Does this small minority really expect a counter-insurgency from the Government? I believe Appleton Tower in Edinburgh was occupied last week. Why?

One of the worst thing that some of the students protesting can do is speak directly into a camera or give their views directly. As this Comment is Free article shows, the convenience of not only circumventing national democracy but circumventing student democracy is counter-productive. The zealotry in the article is unnerving and the us-against-the-world mentality, while understandable given that the coalition won’t now change its collective mind (even if some may safely abstain), is not the smartest way to curry favour with a watching public.

Nick Clegg invited questions on tuition fees yesterday and one that I would have dearly loved to have asked is what would happen to a person who went to university with the best will of the world to ‘make it’ in their chosen field but life, as is so often the case, got in the way and the person was ‘stuck’ on the average wage of £25k/year? They are earning above the £21k cut-off but face a mortgage of £27k, not to mention a second mortgage of whatever university living costs were, nor even the third mortgage that would hopefully exist to (1) provide accommodation and (2) form the basis of any meaningful pension?

Wouldn’t such a millstone around a person’s neck be too much to bear, even before adding in any impacts of children to support, relationships that go awry and any compounding of related or unrelated mental health issues?

These questions, pressing concerns for those impacted and a factor that Scotland will learn from before taking its decision, is getting lost in the shuffle.

The Tories are not for turning, the Lib Dems are all over the place, the Greens and SNP are intent on opposing but are on the fringes of the UK debate and the Scottish debate is still some way off so the only meanginful opposition is the students but they lack the experience and strength in depth to maintain a consistent, clear argument through to the end. Ideally Labour should step up in Westminster and fall in line with correct but grating students on the streets.

Protesting is apparently a right lark but it’s difficult to support it when fairness and respect is flagrantly flaunted. The same, of course, can be said for coalitions.

It is dangerous to assume that one’s experience of High School is the same as that for every other Scot who has ran that six year gauntlet. Not everyone will have had their trousers pulled down onstage during the school production (as rehearsed) or had to fast talk one’s way out of stepping into the middle of gang warfare (not rehearsed). Alternatively, some others may have had their heads flushed down the toilets, something that was promised me but thankfully never materialised, not that it didn’t stop me expecting it at every turn for the first few weeks. I’m just glad I didn’t ‘self-dunk’ over the school holidays to mentally and phyiscally prepare myself, like some sort of primary seven Marine.

Anyway, one thing that all Scottish High School pupils will have faced is the option of six years of education. S1 and S2 are exam and trouble free so pupils start getting properly motivated in S3 and S4, seeking to pass their standard grades; they then ideally find extra gears of motivation for Highers in S5, putting in their first ever stint of months long study; many students then achieve the grades that they need to get into university, finding out close to the start of S6 which institution they will be attending. In such instances, I would imagine most pupils would do as I did, drop classes to the bare minimum and spend as much time as possible hanging out in the common room and/or playing sport, motivation well and truly on the backburner.

Moving onto university, a sudden, sharp burst of passion and enthusiasm for one’s chosen subject is soon replaced by the peer pressure, seductive socialising and general waste of time that is Fresher’s Week and most of the year that follows. Time passes and the need to justify those four long, hedonistic years starts to bite so a 2:1 is salvaged with some last minute cramming in later years.

To chart the levels of motivation and application over these key years for any student, years that will probably shape the rest of their lives, the following could quite reasonably be applied (the first red arrow being S6 at High Achool and the second red arrow being first year university):

Is it not better to just scrap sixth year for those who do not need it and get pupils out there earning and learning? Isn’t it worth trying to smooth that line out and remove those two dips?

The fledgling education debate north of the border seems to be focussing on ways to finance the current process but if we improve and contract the current process then it will inevitably be more affordable. Not necessarily all problems solved but let’s at least get some quick wins under our belt before trying to pass on Tory cuts with no extra revenue.

Examples of such quick wins could include:

– Make Scottish degrees three years in length, instantly saving 25% from the total cost of a typical university qualification and stamping out what tends to be a wasted year for unfocussed students
– Promote the mentality of only doing a sixth year if you are actively studying towards something. Seeing out a year before taking a job or university/college place that is already awaiting you is a waste of a school’s resources and a waste of a student’s time
– Create opportunities for work experience for the period between receiving an unconditional university offer and the start of university, raising money for the studies to come and real life experience that will make studying all the more relevant and valuable
– Matching what a university student earns in a year, over a certain limit, with funding towards fees and/or living allowance

Many people are worried about a double-dip recession but we currently have a double-dip education system that creates unnecessary obstacles for students and prevents from them even wanting to get ahead by offering such tantalising opportunities to muck around and not do very much.

The interesting thing about the lapsing of Scotland’s tax-varying powers is…….. No, just joking, I think 3 posts in a row is enough on that subject for now. Not that it’s necessarily time to move on but it may be time for a short break at least. (And yes, I know the power hasn’t lapsed, earlier error(s) on that score to one side)

A great hip-shaking man once said that we need a little less conversation and a little more action and so it will prove with regard to the great debate over tuition fees as a vote on the issue that has sent many a student into a foaming frenzy is drawing ever closer.

While frustrated Lib Dems are quite free to question what Labour’s alternative policy would be, you don’t enter into a powerful coalition only to point fingers at the other side when the going gets tough so Labour are equally free to vote the coalition proposal down. So, putting things simply, were the vote on tuition fees to be split by the parties of the coalition against everyone else, then, as I understand it, the result would be as follows:

For – 363
Conservatives – 306
Liberal Democrats – 57

Against – 286
Labour – 258
DUP – 8
SNP – 6
Sinn Fein – 5
PC – 3
SDLP – 3
Greens – 1
Others – 2

With students south of the border already successfully targetting Lib Dem MPs to make good on their signed pledges to oppose rises in tuition fees (through the unfortunately named ‘decapitation strategy’), the result of any future vote may well come down to what the Scottish MPs decide to do.

Needless to say, Scottish MPs do not have many constituents who will be affected by these changes (although it could be argued that Scotland would receive less money if England goes ahead with this plan for fees) so, following that logic, Scottish MPs should really abstain from the vote. However, it is unlikely to work that way in practice with the many Labour and SNP MPs expected to vote against the proposal and David Mundell (bless) expected to vote in favour. That leaves the 11 Scottish Lib Dems MPs in an even more awkward position than their southern colleagues and, even more awkwardly, quite possibly holding the balance of power.

It is therefore worthwhile to examine in detail what the position on tuition fees is for each of the Scottish Lib Dem MPs:

Charles Kennedy/Menzies Campbell – An open and shut case. The former Liberal Democrat leaders have stated unequivocally that they disagree with the “direction and thrust of the Coalition’s approach to tuition fees” and “would find it very difficult to abstain”. In what is a startling example of the change in direction that the Liberal Democrats have taken from recent past leaders to the current incumbent, it is clear that Kennedy and Campbell will be voting against Nick Clegg’s preferred result.

Mike Crockart – The newly-installed Edinburgh West MP is said to be considering his position as aide to Michael Moore as he wrestles with the “difficult” decision having signed a pledge not to raise fees. Looks likely to abstain or vote against.

Malcolm Bruce – Has said that he is “very sympathetic to the students’ cause” but has not yet stated how he will vote.

Alan Reid/John Thurso/Robert Smith – The latest explanation for not yet providing a decision from these Lib Dem MPs is a mix of waiting and seeing, wanting time to study the proposals and wanting as progressive a solution as possible. All perfectly valid points of view for such a complicated vote to have to make but this trio will have to go down as undecideds for now.

Alistair Carmichael – As Deputy Chief Whip, the Orkney & Shetland MP is largely expected to vote in favour of the increase to fees in what is, geographically, the most extreme example of the West Lothian Question in action. Indeed, the Daily Mail reports that he is at the forefront of a deal that would see backbenchers abstain and Minister vote in favour.

Jo Swinson – Has valiantly put her head above the parapet early and explained in fine detail why she will be voting in favour of a fee increase alongside the coalition.

Michael Moore – Cannot vote against the coalition’s proposals without losing his job and neither Nick Clegg nor David Cameron would want a third Scottish Secretary in such quick succession. Will surely vote in favour.

Danny Alexander – Given that the Chief Secretary to the Treasury had written before the election that the Liberal Democrats should abandon their pledge on tuition fees, it will come as no surprise that the MP representing Inverness, Nairn, Badenoch, & Strathspey will vote in favour of increasing fees.

So, I make that to be:

2 Scottish Lib Dem MPs against
5 Scottish Lib Dem MPs undecideds
4 Scottish Lib Dem MPs for

It’s a mixed bag but the complications do not stop there. The next vote on tuition fees is largely expected to take place before Christmas and one of the biggest issues in the Holyrood campaign will be whether Scottish students should pay fees north of the border. Is it feasible for a constituency to have a Scottish MP voting in favour of English universities charging up to £9,000 a year in fees while the Scottish MSP of the same party and for the same constituency is campaigning for no fees to be applied in Scotland?

The West Lothian Question is a problem that won’t go away. There have been many proposed solutions to the anomaly, two of which came from either side of the coalition Government.

As far as I can make out, The Conservatives Party’s proposed solution is ‘English votes for English laws’ (as included in its manifesto) and the Liberal Democrats’ proposed solution is a form of federalism where England would have an English Parliament within which it would make its own devolved decisions. Both solutions would dictate that Scottish politicians, now and then, should not have a say over how other nations within the UK will conduct its own affairs.

So, for me, there are two and a half reasons why Scotland’s Liberal Democrat MPs should not be voting in favour of increasing tuition fees in England – (1) their party’s proposed solution to the West Lothian Question precludes them from having a say, (1.5) it would reduce the money going to Scotland and, more pertinently, (2.5) they signed a pledge promising not to.

I’m not going to talk about something as unseemly as ‘decapitation’ but, well, let’s just wait and see what all of our Scottish MPs contribute to this vote, and why, particularly unpredictable the Lib Dems.