LINE TO TAKE
RESTRICTED
4830 - 2
3. YOU SHOULD NOT (NOT) INITIATE DISCUSSION ON THIS MATTER BUT IF IT IS RAISED YOU SHOULD TAKE THE FOLLOWING LINE WITH YOUR
CONTACTS:
(A)
THE LORDS' JUDGEMENT COULD HAVE COST THE BRITISH TAXPAYER
POUNDS STERLING 30 MILLION A YEAR IN LOST FEE INCOME ALONE AND WOULD HAVE MEANT A RETURN TO THE PREVIOUS
INDISCRIMINATE SUBSIDY OF OVERSEAS STUDENTS:
(B)
POLICY HAS BEEN TO END THE GENERAL SUBSIDY IN FAVOUR OF
SELECTIVE AND TARGETED AWARDS:
(C)
THE BILL MERELY ENABLES THE GOVERNMENT TO CONTINUE THE
POLICIES EXISTING PRIOR TO THE LORDS' JUDGEMENT:
(D)
(E)
(F)
THE BILL PROVIDES FOR THE FIRST TIME A CLEAR STATUTORY
BASIS FOR DISTINGUISHING BETWEEN HOME AND OVERSEAS
STUDENTS:
THE GOVERNMENT REAFFIRMS THE IMPORTANCE IT ATTACHES TO
ENCOURAGING OVERSEAS STUDENTS TO STUDY HERE AND, WHERE APPROPRIATE TO BE GIVEN ASSISTANCE TO DO SO. HENCE THE
DECISION TO MAKE AN EXTRA POUNDS STERLING 46 MILLION
AVAILABLE FOR ADDITIONAL AWARDS OVER THE PERIOD
1983/84 TO 1985/86:
ANY AWARDS MADE AS A RESULT OF THE LORDS' JUDGEMENT WOULD
HAVE BEEN WINDFALLS SINCE NO STUDENTS ALREADY HERE COULD
HAVE EXPECTED SO TO BENEFIT.
FURTHER BACKGROUND
4.
·
di
FOR YOUR OWN INFORMATION, THE GOVERNMENT INTENDS THAT STUDENTS
WHO DO NOT QUALIFY FOR THE 'HOME STUDENT'' RATE OF FEE FOR 1983/84 AND THEREAFTER UNDER THE NEW REGULATIONS SHOULD PAY THE
OVERSEAS RATE FOR THOSE YEARS EVEN IF THEY CAN CLAIM IN THE
LIGHT OF THE DECEMBER RULING THAT THEY SHOULD HAVE BEEN REGARDED
AS ORDINARILY RESIDENT HERE IN THE CURRENT ACADEMIC YEAR OR IN
2
RESTRICTED
Page 135Page 136