1 / 8

De-regulation, corporate form and the privatisation of higher education

De-regulation, corporate form and the privatisation of higher education. The Coalition’s de-regulatory agenda.

lonaj
Download Presentation

De-regulation, corporate form and the privatisation of higher education

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. De-regulation, corporate form and the privatisation of higher education

  2. The Coalition’s de-regulatory agenda • Creating a regulatory level playing field for new private sector providers – eg, access to subsidies, reform of DAPs, University Title: removing the regulatory ‘barriers’ to new entrants. • Reshaping taxation in favour of private providers VAT exemption • Opening up the assets – giving institutions more ‘flexibility’ in choosing and changing their corporate form.

  3. Why is corporate form important? “Sweating the assets” • In part, solving the ‘problem’ of the asset locks on post-92 universities – the higher education corporation. • Chartered corporations and companies limited by guarantee – more ‘freedoms’ to use their assets. • Push is coming from private companies looking to take over institutions and from private equity funds active in the sector.

  4. UCU’s national response • After the defeat of the ‘Big Bang’ legislation (a UCU led campaign) Coalition’s new strategy: non-legislative means UCU’s response: • Strategic response: regulatory blocking; ‘raising the cost’ for private companies; restrictions on institutions’ freedom • Our argument that for-profits are different and our regulatory system cannot deal with them • Pursued through lobbying and campaigning around consultations on Student number controls and VAT, plus pressure on HEFCE over regulatory framework and corporate form

  5. The nightmare that is the HE regulatory framework

  6. UCU’s future strategy? We have national policies of opposition to privatisation Continue national level campaigning to defend existing barriers and raise regulatory burden on private companies Lobbying/bargaining for workforce regulation National policy debate about what constitutes public post-secondary education and how to rebuild it

  7. The local impact of de-regulation: increased market pressure on HEIs, changing corporate behaviour and ‘innovation’ Bond issues, joint venture companies, subsidiary companies, shared services, outsourcing and…takeovers? ‘two-tier workforces’, race to the bottom and transfer

  8. UCU’s local response Strategy: • raise the cost to institutions in terms of reputation damage and raise the cost to private companies (poisoned pills) Our agenda: • Asserting our right to early consultation and negotiation • Limiting use of assets in relation to corporate form • Establishing a Fair Employment Charter to govern transfers and new workforces • Active and early campaigning in support of our bargaining objectives (eg. UCLAN)

More Related