Access Alliance: our concerns and proposals

Where we are

• Rents this year rose by 8.3% plus inflation.
• Council have indicated that they expect similar increases to be implemented for at least the next three years.
• King's rents are now about £45 per week, although it is not currently possible to get an exact figure because non-central heating (gas costs for example) and electricity do not make up the official figure.
• Students have to pay an additional £9.10 a week "College Charge" - a compulsory levy not common to other universities. Many other institutions provide similarly priced canteens to that in King's without an equivalent levy.
• Most Colleges are implementing the Bursars' Report's recommendations which seek to rise rents to about £60 per week (weekly bills to £70). No College at the time of writing has yet formally rejected this report.

Access and rents

• Cambridge has grave difficulty attracting the ablest pupils from state schools in general, and middle and low income families in particular.
• The University is perceived as elitist and geared to the wealthy.
• Retention of the remainder of the College Fee is partly conditional on improving the University's access profile.

Hardship funds and access

• Hardship funds do play an important role in supporting students in serious financial difficulty.
• However, comparatively high costs and increasing reliance on hardship funds for the poorest students give the impression that the 'normal' applicant is wealthy.
• Many students would prefer to go to a university where it was not necessary to go cap-in-hand to the authorities in order to study there.
• Potential applicants have huge uncertainty over whether they will receive these funds, but complete certainty that they will have to pay the rent.
• There is a vast swathe of pupils from middle income families that are not eligible for this support. The majority of current state school applicants fall into this category (Source: HEFCE).

What we think

• If Cambridge is to attract the best it cannot be significantly more expensive to attend than comparable universities.
• Current evidence (both from NUS Accommodation Costs Survey and the recent CUSU Survey) suggests that Cambridge 'rent' alone is roughly comparable to most other ex-London Universities. However, this ignores the "College Charge", a compulsory levy that increases student bills by about 20%.
• Half of all students find paid work whilst at university in order to supplement their income. Students here are not allowed to work during term time and are promptly removed from their rooms at the end of term in order to facilitate the conference trade (in most other universities it is possible for many people to stay much longer, which allows them to find work in a university town - if you live in the Welsh valleys, for example, there is often no possibility of work at home.)
• The "College Charge" is a significant levy that disproportionately affects those students who mainly self-cater.
• Cambridge University must be able to say, with confidence, that it is not more expensive to attend than other institutions and that it is interested in ability not wealth. Students must have confidence that this message is factually correct, and sincerely meant.
• The Bursars' Report was confidential and gave a derisory consideration of the access issues involved. The fact that no students, Admissions Tutors or Senior Tutors were involved in its research or conclusions further undermines its credibility, as does their refusal to publish the figures over costs from all the Colleges used in their claims over 'subsidy'.

What we think King's should do

1. Agree to the principle that Cambridge costs should be comparable with other institutions.
2. Formally reject the Bursars' Report as sufficient basis for making rent policy and agree not to go along with its recommendations for future increases.
3. Request to the Colleges' Committee that there be a moratorium on the rent increases and that a "Rents and Access" group be formed with the following remit: "To investigate the implications of current and proposed levels of student charges on applications to Cambridge University". Its membership and precise points of reference to be agreed.
4. If the Colleges' Committee decline King's request then College should, along with other Colleges wishing to do so, set up the group itself.
5. King's should give all those who are forced to pay the College Charge a binding referendum on whether it should be ended and true prices charged in canteen (as happens in most other Universities and Colleges throughout the rest of the country).
6. We should publish each year a full breakdown of all charges for each room, so that students can compare their own bills against this and have confidence that the 'average' figure is correct and that they will not be hit in the future by large unexpected charges.
7. To publish prominently in the King's prospectus a feature on Hardship Funds: to whom and under what circumstances they are available. To urge the University to do the same in the Cambridge prospectus.

We do not feel that the positive case for these rent increases has been made nor that the central concern over access has been sufficiently addressed. The burden of proof must lie with those proposing these very big rises.

Access Alliance Executive, November 1999.

Copyright © 2000 Access Alliance