Written evidence submitted by the Association
of Independent Higher Education Providers (SV26)
I am writing to you in my capacity as Chair of the
Association of Independent Higher Education Providers (AIHEP)
to express my deep concern about the implications of the above
proposals. Our Association, incorporating London School of Commerce,
The University of Buckingham, Holborn College, Bellerbys College,
School of Technology and Management, Greenwich School of Management
and Kensington College of Business, has developed a highly successful
reputation for delivering Undergraduate and Postgraduate University
courses for International students in recent years—and has
become a major export industry in the UK. The eight member colleges
enrol some 15,000 International students from over 100 countries
and the total revenue that they generate for the UK is over 250
million pounds per year. As an example, one member, London School
of Commerce, which is the Associate College of the University
of Wales Institute, Cardiff, has over 5,000 students from over
120 countries at its central London campuses and currently has
Europe's largest MBA course, with over 2,500 students.
The proposed package of restrictions on Tier 4 Migration,
as they stand, will have a profound and severe detrimental effect
on this industry. These restrictions are clearly designed to reduce
student numbers, and the effect will generally be indiscriminate
and will deter genuine and committed students from studying in
the United Kingdom. This could seriously damage a vital export
industry and produce a considerable reduction in export earnings
and tax revenue in the UK, as well as increasing unemployment
and the demand on public spending.
I would like to point out that International students
are not immigrants, in that they attend our member institutions
for the period of their course of study and then are required
to return to their home country. Our members have strict measures
to ensure that we admit only genuine students, under the UKBA's
Highly Trusted Status, and each student's progress and attendance
is carefully monitored and is subject to Home Office inspection
and review. Therefore, I am very concerned that measures that
purport to reduce illegal immigration could, in fact, diminish
or destroy a growth sector that is currently making a great contribution
to the UK's prosperity and global reputation. We would, therefore,
like to make some constructive suggestions that could minimize
the detrimental implications of the proposals, but not damage
any positive effect on reducing illegal immigration.
In particular, with regard to a number of measures
proposed, we would suggest that:
- 1. With regard to limiting the part time
work system, that students chose the UK as a study destination
for a complete "whole learning" situation and a limited
exposure to a work placement or employment, particularly in London,
is beneficial and we suggest that this should not be abolished
or restricted to weekends or campus employment but perhaps be
reduced from 20 hours per week to 10-12 hours per week. Furthermore
that this should only be for students who are enrolled at institutions
who have the UKBA Highly Trusted Status.
- 2. On the Post Study Work, system, this should
perhaps be restricted only to students who successfully complete
a postgraduate degree, as these can make a real contribution to
the economy in a highly skilled capacity and could perhaps then
meet the requirements to become a Highly Skilled Migrant. This
would also encourage talented undergraduates to progress on to
postgraduate courses in the UK. We also propose that this be restricted
to students at 'Highly Trusted Status' institutions.
- 3. Asking current students to return home
to apply for a new visa to progress on to a new course,and limiting
student visa extensions, will all have the effect of seriously
discouraging genuine, highly intelligent and pro- British students
from applying for courses in the United Kingdom. We would suggest
that it is not a practical proposal and would prefer to continue
the present system of visas being renewed in the UK, but that
the number of renewals in the UK be limited to two for each student.
We have evidence that these proposals, as they stand,
have already received major press coverage abroad and have been
criticised by prospective students, their families and by friendly
Foreign Governments, and we would suggest that our above suggested
amendments would be effective in allaying some of these fears.
I am sure that the Committee understands that the
AIHEP colleges represent the voice of high quality Higher Education
in the UK. One of our members, the University of Buckingham is
a fully recognised University and another, London School of Commerce
has submitted an application for Degree Awarding powers to the
Privy Council. We have a close relationship with David Willetts
MP, the Minister with responsibility for Universities and we have
been invited for discussions with him regarding interim solutions
to the future funding crisis in higher education. We are seeking,
in all current issues and particularly with regard to these proposals,
a "level playing field" with the same recognition as
the UK universities and the same standards being applied. We recognise
that there are abuses to the Immigration regulations in both sectors
and that solutions must be found that are acceptable, and are
equal, in the state and private sector.
On behalf of our members, I would like to point out
that your proposals,as they stand, will be welcomed by our International
competitors—particularly Australia, where International
Education is their third largest export industry and where International
students are not included in their Immigration statistics. Apart
from the economic implications for the UK, we fear for the damage
that will be done to Britain's reputation abroad, in that we have
always been the natural choice as the destination for future major
decision makers, and future world leaders,to experience a high
quality education—and this cultural and developmental experience
will now probably be denied to a high proportion of prospective
students.
I seriously urge the committee to review and amend
these damaging proposals, as they will have a negligible effect
on reducing illegal immigration, but will have a significantly
adverse effect on the future success of the Association of Independent
Higher Education Providers.
January 2011
|
