Browne Review

[12] The Labour Party manifesto for the 2010 General Election promised extra University places but made no commitment on how much students would have to pay.

The Liberal Democrats agreed to abstain on a vote to increase fees as part of a Liberal-Conservative coalition government which emerged following the 2010 General Election.

[26] The MP for the student-populated Leeds North West, Greg Mulholland, is considered to be the leader of a backbench rebellion against the review that is indicated to have the support of at least thirty Liberal Democrats.

[31] The Russell Group's submission to the review stated that graduates should pay real rates of interest on their student loans to prevent a university funding crisis.

[33] Wendy Piatt, head of the Russell Group, has stated that current levels of funding are not adequate if Universities are to remain globally competitive.

[34] The 1994 Group have called for the review to ensure that cost does not prevent people from attending University and for a focus on the student experience.

[34] Million+ have stated that students should not be asked to pay more for cuts in public funding and Unions 94 have called for more progressive alternatives to variable tuition fees.

"[52] On 9 December 2010, the day of the House of Commons vote on whether to approve measures which could see the rise in tuition fees, further demonstrations were held in London.

The protests, this time policed by 2800 officers, saw tensions running high and angry scenes as the debate on the proposals was discussed in the Commons.

Two Vice-Chancellors and a civil servant who advised the government on the introduction of the current fee regime also form part of the team conducting the review.

[53] Following the 2010 General Election Lord Browne accepted a role as the Government's lead non-executive director to advise on the appointment of business leaders to reformed departmental boards.

In November 2009, Liberal Democrat Universities Spokesperson Stephen Williams stated: "The lack of student representatives is particularly concerning as it is these people who will really suffer if fees are raised.

BBC education journalist Mike Baker suggested that the Browne Review which had been expected to report in the summer would be delayed until the Autumn so as to avoid opponents causing trouble over fees during the party conference season.

[34] In July 2010, Labour MP Pat McFadden criticised anonymous briefings from the Conservative Party against the possibility of a graduate tax, a policy which had been mooted by Liberal Democrat Vince Cable.

He stated: "It is completely shambolic for the Lib Dem secretary of state to make a speech advocating one policy one week then for a Tory briefing to point in a different direction a week late....Discussion of higher education finance within the coalition is now being governed more by managing the internal politics of the government than the interests of students, universities or the wider taxpayer.

"[58] Oxford University Student Union criticised the fact that the Russell Group's submission the Browne review was confidential with a freedom of information request being rejected.

The UK Youth Parliament believed that lifting the cap on University tuition fees would force young people to make "financially driven choices when it comes to choosing where and what to study".

Former Member of UK Youth Parliament and UKYP National Spokesperson Harrison Carter commented on behalf of the organisation saying: "Fees themselves are unfair and act as a barrier to education, widening the rich-poor divide which exists in this country.

"We are deeply concerned that young people under the age of 18, those whom increased fees will actually hit, haven't been adequately consulted about the proposed changes to university funding.

"Young people up and down the country, starting secondary school, studying for their GCSEs, or thinking about A-levels – those are the ones who will be making life changing choices, based on this review and decisions made behind closed doors.

It is essential that the Government demonstrates they are in tune with young people's views, by widely consulting under 18-year-olds and establishing the impact upon this group, before any legislative change to university funding is introduced.

In 2014, Nick Hillman of the Higher Education Policy Institute stated that the government had "got its maths wrong" by overestimating the amount of money students would repay with a £21,000 threshold.