Student fees Bill challenge to MP

A Bristol Labour MP has been challenged on a betrayal of a campaign promise. Valerie Davey has been asked by Lib Dem Stephen Williams whether she intends to support the government in the vote on 27th January to introduce student 'top-up' fees.

The rivals for the Bristol West seat have been exchanging letters on Mrs Davey's Commons voting record on fees and other issues. Stephen Williams, the Lib Dems' candidate who also stood for the seat in 2001 says:

"During the last general election I raised the issue of tuition fees several times at the public debates between the candidates. I suggested that as Labour had introduced tuition fees when it had not been part of their 1997 manifesto, no one should be surprised if they increased the fees after the 2001 election. Valerie dismissed this and referred to the Labour manifesto pledge that stated the party did not favour top up fees and had legislated to prevent them."

"Now we know that Tony Blair is prepared to disregard this clear manifesto pledge. But is Valerie Davey prepared to support him? In her most recent letter to me she concedes that she "would support an increase in fees as a fair way of funding the university system..." so it is clear that she supports fees in principle."

Mrs Davey has expressed concern about variation of fees between different courses and universities. But the latest survey (The Guardian - 13th January 2004) of universities suggests that most of them will charge the maximum fees for all of their courses.

Stephen Williams concludes:

"The Liberal Democrats oppose fees and would instead give extra funds to universities from an increased tax on those earning more than £100,000 a year. We believe in fair taxes on high incomes. Labour want a poll tax on knowledge. Fees are unfair and I'm sure Bristol West electors will not forgive this betrayal by Labour."

The full text of Stephen Williams' latest letter to Valerie Davey, in response to her letter of the 17th December, is shown below :

Dear Valerie

Thank you for your letter of 17th December 2003.

Top up fees

I wrote to you on 4th December to ask for a clarification of your stance on student tuition top up fees. The reason I asked for clarification was that you had signed Commons EDM 7 which was trailed in the media as a list of likely Labour rebels against the government's policy. Yet you had also voted with the government (rather than abstain) in order to defeat anti-fees motions that had been tabled on the floor of the House by both the Liberal Democrats and the Conservatives. In addition, your own web site is rather ambiguous as you state that, "Universities do need more money, but I do not think charging top up fees is the way to provide it... However, I do think well off students should make some contribution to their education."

In your letter to me you now concede that you "would support an increase in fees as a fair way of funding the university system", which at least is a clear statement that you support the principle of charging tuition fees. Your remaining doubt appears to be over the variable rate of increased fees. No doubt your own government ministers will point out to you that this is illogical. If you accept the principle of the student and the general taxpayer sharing the funding of universities then you must recognise that existing government funding will already differentiate between universities and courses.

It should at least now be clear to Bristol West electors that you support the levying of tuition fees and also support increasing them. I do not support tuition fees and my party has a costed alternative.

You refer to the Liberal Democrat alternative to tuition fees as "a magic tax" on the wealthy. Frankly, this is a rather silly piece of New Labour spin. Our tax proposals are to introduce a new top rate of income tax of 50% on taxable incomes in excess of £100,000 pa. This would raise approximately £4.5 billion of which we would allocate £2.5 billion to universities, the balance going to long-term care for the elderly and to cushion a reform of local taxes.

The Lib Dem tax policy would enable us to do away with tuition fees and reintroduce means tested student grants. If the government followed this policy then funds would immediately be available to universities, whereas under Labour's policy it will be many years before universities feel the benefit of fees.

Iraq

In your letter you concede that you did not vote against the government's motion authorising war in Iraq. However, your website and Labour leaflets circulated in Bristol West state that local people supported your "decision to vote for amendments in the Commons, which said that the case for military intervention had not been made." You may not have intended to mislead people but I have come across many electors who think that their MP 'voted against the war', when you did not. On 18th March 2003 you voted in Division 117 for the cross party amendment tabled by Chris Smith, Douglas Hogg and Menzies Campbell that called for more time and referred to the absence of UN authorisation. When that amendment was lost you then abstained on the motion itself.

Your assertion that I do not understand House of Commons voting procedures is bizarre. The records show in Division 118 that 85 of your fellow Labour MPs voted against the government. These included Robin Cook, Chris Smith and Kingswood MP Roger Berry - are they as ignorant as me? Chris Smith was one of the sponsors of the amendment, so it is strange that he felt able to vote against the government, which you say wasn't necessary! The fact remains that when the main question was put, to authorise war, you abstained whereas 52 Liberal Democrat MPs and over 80 Labour MPs and a handful of Conservatives voted against. I think that most Bristol West electors will not see an abstention as a particularly courageous stance on your part.

Finally, I notice that your web site says that I have "backed down" from the points made in my original letter to you. I assume this nonsense comes from an over-eager member of your staff rather than yourself, but, as should be clear from the above, there is no reason for me to retreat. It now remains to be seen if you will vote for the government's top up fees proposals. This would be a clear breach of an explicit manifesto pledge that you stood by - and defended in debates with me in May and June 2001 - that Labour had no plans to introduce top up fees and had legislated to prevent them.

Yours sincerely

Stephen Williams

Liberal Democrat Parliamentary Candidate for Bristol West