Liam Burns: MSPs must be clear how higher tuition is to be paid for

One of the first things that struck me about the speech's coverage was the repeated references to Scottish higher education as "free".

The students I talk to who are forced into thousands of pounds of commercial debt, lose out to a postcode lottery for childcare support and work over 20 hours a week certainly don't see their education as "free". Not only that, education is only "free" to full-time undergraduates which means a significant number of students, often from non-traditional backgrounds and those affected most by the recession, still have a price tag hanging over their head.

A student in England can expect a minimum student support income of 3,564 per year whereas a Scottish student will have to get by on just 915. At the top end there is still over 500 difference. Clearly it is no coincidence that Scotland has a poor record when it comes to both attracting and keeping students from poorer backgrounds in our universities. Why even consider a graduate contribution?

We do not know yet how large the funding gap between English and Scottish universities will be should either top-up fees be increased or a graduate contribution be introduced.

Nor do we know where the Scottish Government will focus any cuts resulting from reduced public spending south of the Border. What we absolutely do know is that thousands of Scottish students are already being failed by insufficient funding while they are studying, if they even apply in the first place.

We must never forget that we have a different and distinct funding crisis in Scotland where students are dropping out or never even arriving on our campuses in the first place because we simply don't put enough cash into supporting students.

A progressive graduate contribution - where those who see a genuine financial benefit contribute to ensuring education is accessible to all - then becomes not a compromise position but a fairer position.

Increased public investment during a recession is both a financial and social imperative. It makes little to no sense to inflict damaging cuts that leave young people in the dole queue instead of in the lecture theatre.

However, if we accept that increased public spending in the current climate is unlikely, then it becomes questionable whether the banker, chief exec or high court judge on exceptionally large wages should not contribute towards ensuring the education they have clearly benefited from is accessible to all.

What might a graduate contribution look like? A graduate contribution which is progressive, only applies when and if the individual sees a genuine financial benefit from their degree, and is given back to support students from the poorest backgrounds absolutely merits further consideration.

But let's be clear, any call to implement a progressive graduate contribution without the explicit promise of an increase in student support levels would deliver the worst of both worlds.

It would bring back the concept of a private contribution in Scotland while maintaining our currently exclusive admissions record, and will almost certainly face concerted opposition from students and their families.

In the run-up to the Scottish Parliamentary elections, Scottish politicians must now be clear how they are going to improve student support without sacrificing education which is free at the point of entry. •Liam Burns is President of NUS Scotland.