Watching anarchy spreading through the streets of London, I can't help wondering why nobody seems to be drawing attention to what might be the root of the problem - and that is that the numbers of so-called students in the UK has pretty well quadrupled in recent years. So, it's patently obvious that it costs more nowadays and something has to be done to meet that additional expense.
Which part of that don't the protesters understand?
I said so-called students, by the way, because my idea of a student is someone who studies; in other word, analyses a subject in an academic manner. In my time, that was done at universities. In recent times, however, other further education establishments - former polytechnic colleges, for example - have been elevated to university status despite the fact that their students in some departments are only required to learn (as opposed to analyse) a trade or vocation. (I expect economy will have been a major factor for this; although I have heard it suggested that employers making degrees an occupational requirement might be the reason).
Now, if qualifications from former colleges have been elevated to degree status to meet the demands of employers, it shouldn't be unreasonable to suggest they re-introduce apprenticeship schemes. Then, they (the employers) could ensure their employees reach a standard which meets their own requirement and, perhaps, more importantly, some, if not all, of the cost could be met by the company. The money saved by the government could then be put back into 'proper' education - as opposed to trade-training.