here - United Kingdom Parliament

1723 Student Visas
6 JUNE 2013
Student Visas
1724
difficult balance that has to be struck between ensuring
that we win the global race, but address the legitimate
concerns many of my constituents have about the level
of immigration.
1.50 pm
Mr Andrew Smith (Oxford East) (Lab): I would like
to join in congratulating my hon. Friend the Member
for West Bromwich West (Mr Bailey) and other colleagues
on securing this important debate. He made some important
points, as have all the subsequent speakers. It is good to
see cross-party agreement emerging that we have to
remove students from the immigration target in domestic
policy.
With two universities and numerous independent colleges
in Oxford East, my constituents are among the hardest
hit by the ill-judged policies on student visas and
immigration that the Government have brought in.
They have inflicted serious damage on the reputation
and attractiveness of the UK, and on the economic and
cultural contribution that overseas students, and those
who teach them, make to our country. The Government’s
policies amount to a perverse and stupid act of economic
self-sabotage. They hit a part of our economy where
Britain in general, and Oxford in particular, have a
strong global strategic competitive advantage. There is
a logical contradiction in the Government protesting
that there is no cap on student numbers, while persisting
in including student numbers in their overall target of
reducing net immigration to tens rather than hundreds
of thousands. They find it so difficult to control other
areas of immigration, including illegal immigration,
that there is continual downward pressure on student
numbers.
We are fortunate in Oxford to have many high-quality
institutions. It shows how ludicrous this policy is if we
imagine it being applied to another area; for example, to
our Mini plant—to manufacturing, as opposed to
educational exports. Imagine a Government who have
an overall limit on manufacturing exports because they
do not want too many foreigners getting their hands on
our goods. As the number of BMW Minis being exported
falls because overseas dealers worry that they will not
be able to fulfil orders, the Prime Minister flies out to
the far east and attempts to reassure people that while
he is determined to bring down net manufacturing
exports, there is no cap on the export of Minis! Such a
policy would be barmy, way beyond swivel-eyed, and
yet economically that is exactly what the cuts in overseas
students amount to.
Roberta Blackman-Woods (City of Durham) (Lab):
My right hon. Friend is making a powerful speech.
Does he agree that it is simply no good for the Prime
Minister to be going on these visits overseas supposedly
to increase our exports when one of our very best
exports, higher education, is being undermined by the
Government’s policy?
Mr Smith: Indeed. That the Prime Minister felt he
had to say that was a tacit acknowledgement of the
damage done to the UK’s reputation.
Jackie Doyle-Price: It is my understanding that
applications from overseas students to Oxford university
have gone up by 22%. Is the right hon. Gentleman not
mis-characterising the objective of the policy, which is
to cut down on bogus student applications while still
allowing our higher education sector to thrive?
Mr Smith: The problem is that not enough is being
done to encourage it to thrive. As was pointed out
earlier, Universities UK takes issue with some of the
figures, but however we characterise them the current
position is pretty flat. For a global market that is
expanding so quickly, it simply is not good enough.
Of course the closure of visa factories masquerading
as colleges is a good thing, not least because of the
impact on applicants, as my hon. Friend the Member
for Islington North (Jeremy Corbyn) pointed out. They
damage the reputation of UK education as well as
undermine legitimate immigration control, but it is
important to understand that the way the Government
and UKBA have gone about their wider changes have
hit legitimate universities and colleges that are an
enormously important source of intellectual capital,
jobs and prosperity, both now and for the future, that is
worth tens of billions of pounds.
The hon. Member for Thurrock (Jackie Doyle-Price)
mentioned Oxford university. Its briefing for this debate
points out:
“The cumulative and frequent changes to Tier 4 policy guidance
over the last few years have created increased anxiety amongst
our current and prospective student body especially when some of
the rule changes were applied retrospectively.”
It goes on to say:
“We have received feedback and comments from prospective
students and institutions overseas about the numerous UKBA
rule changes over the last few years that indicate it may be a
determining factor in students choosing to study elsewhere.”
The Government have to understand that those damaging
effects have an impact at a time of intense international
competition, in particular for the highest calibre of
undergraduates, post-graduates and researchers. The
funding shortfall for postgraduates, especially compared
with the United States, makes it an increasing challenge
to recruit and retain the best. Oxford university makes
it clear that it supports the recommendations of the
Select Committee reports referred to in the motion.
Let us also recognise that the damaging impact of
Government policy has not been confined to universities
and university students. Indeed, the effects have been
even more serious for independent colleges, whose
educational and economic contribution rarely gets the
credit it deserves, and seems to be totally ignored by this
Government. It is deeply ironic that a Government with
an ideological obsession about liberating schools for
home students from state control are hammering private
colleges that support thousands of jobs and billions of
pounds of overseas earnings.
Nicola Blackwood: As a fellow Oxford MP, the right
hon. Gentleman will know that I share some of his
concerns about student reforms, but it is important that
the debate continues with factual information. The 22%
figure quoted by my hon. Friend the Member for Thurrock
(Jackie Doyle-Price) is based on data from the Higher
Education Statistics Agency, and is used in both the
Universities UK and Million+ briefings. The points
that he was just making are important, because the falls
we have seen are in the FE college and private college
sectors. The main concerns from the university have