As it happens, my daughter went up to Parliament (House of Commons, House of Lords and Royal Courts of Justice in the Strand) yesterday, but on a school sixth-form trip as she's doing law. Met the local MP, and grilled him over this for forty minutes, got nowhere, obviously, but at least now she understands how politicians won't answer a straight question.
The point she was making is this:
1: The demographics show that there's an increasing elderly population, a proportion of which will need care and support from the state, and due to various governmental policies almost no-one outside civil servant/local authority jobs are saving enough for a proper level of pension these days, and so will be relying on the state for support as they get older, leading to a higher burden for the country over the next ten/twenty/thirty years.
2: Current Governmental policy is having the effect of restricting the opportunity of people who are leaving school over the next few years to be able to go to Uni. Some families cannot afford the current cost of supporting a child through the system, where they are mostly only paying for upkeep, rent, living expenses, alcohol and drugs, and a smaller amount for fees. If the fees increase, this becomes more of a burden, and in some cases will mean that the child's family cannot support them to go.
3: This situation is made worse by the dire state of the economy, and the risk/actuality of unemployment affecting the family, coupled with increases in living costs and VAT, no income from savings, and with the single exception of tracker mortgages, increases in borrowing costs of all kinds.
4: So more economic burden for the country, meaning that taxation pressures on the Government are likely to result in further revenue-raising initiatives, due to higher need for Government funds but less people attaining a proper level of education and earning good salaries, with less jobs available.
A classic Keyensian supply and demand situation, and we can all see the likely outcome.
The funny thing is that the current students are less likely to be affected by this than the next generation, still currently in school,who will find that for the next ten years or so (barring a complete reversal in policy) a Uni education is unaffordable for many more families than is currently the case.
Why do I feel strongly about this? I have twin 16yo's, who aren't that likely to go to Uni at the moment, and that'll affect the rest of their lives.
And assuming that I live long enough, (because I am hoping that they will be able to contribute towards the costs of my eventual old age care), mine and my wife's lives as well.
So although I condemn the means and methods of student protest, I support the protests, as I think that the current crop of politicians are looking at short term solutions leading to mid and long-term problems.
But aren't all student protests more harshly treated by authorities the world over than if they were made by middle-aged or older people? Think of France, America, China, etc.
Sorry for the rant,
I suppose it's a bit of Nimbyism, as I'm mostly concerned about the situation from my own family's perspective.
She can copy and paste this for her homework, and send it to our MP!