While MPs voted by 267 to 193 against a Liberal Democrat motion to abandon the plans, the government's majority was only 74.

The result came as Labour MPs expressed their opposition to the policy which could see students charged up to �3,000 a year from September 2006.

Is the government right to persist with this policy, or is it a retrograde step that will deter students from going to universities?

Thank you for your e-mails. This debate is now closed. The following comments reflect the balance of views we received:

I'm considering re-training as a physiotherapist. I would graduate and work for the NHS on about �17k per annum. Would an extra �9-12k of debt put me off? Probably.
Tony Brooks, UK

3 A levels at grade C or above should be the minimum for a university education. Any student with lower grades has already struggled at A-level and would not benefit from more complex studies. This would soon see the standards rising and the Mickey Mouse degrees abandoned.
Chris, UK

The best students are encouraged to chase cash Tim, Durham, UK

Possibly the most worrying effect for the government is the mindset of people now graduating. Students are told that a university education is something that costs a lot, but enables you to make a lot more; so the best students are encouraged to chase cash - not to become doctors, or lecturers, or researchers making the next vital discovery that will keep this country at the front of modern advances. While some laudable debt-burdened graduates still ignore self-interest and take the lower-paid vital jobs research and higher degrees are swiftly becoming the option, not for the best, but for those who can't get jobs elsewhere. Government, beware!
Tim, Durham, UK

It really has little to do with education; the government is going very seriously broke. There is a state of near panic at the Inland Revenue with regard targets.
Steve, UK

The UK is lucky to have the education system that it has Steve Lubin RN,MSN, USA

In the US, we have to pay for our education. I did two jobs, went to school full time and raised two kids alone and still managed to earn a masters degree in nursing. The UK is lucky to have the education system that it has.
Steve Lubin RN,MSN, USA

Surely 9,000 isn't a vast sum of money. From the time your child is born, you could save up 500 pounds a year and have enough to send a child to university. Or take a loan which could be repaid very easily. Oh yeah, I forgot about the punitive taxes that prevent people from saving even the most meagre amounts.
Ewan, UK

Why not invest in other more varied forms of training and learning? Jill, UK

Of course top up fees will deter students. Why is the government encouraging such a high proportion of students to go to university when they must accrue so much debt to do so, and while the rate of graduate unemployment is increasing? Why not invest in other more varied forms of training and learning? We have already partially returned to the old system where you go to university if you can afford to do so, rather than on academic merit. What will happen to the economy in a few years time when a whole generation of graduates emerge from the system to unemployment and debt?
Jill, UK

Why don't students study at their closest university whilst continuing to live at home - that way huge living expenses could be avoided? If you want an education - help yourself; if you want 3 years of playing at living away - pay for it.
Paul, England

You're going to have to pay, whether through taxes paid later or directly John, UK

I really can't see what all the fuss is about. Having worked in administration of student awards for a local authority, I have seen this issue without all the media hype. Only well-off families (a tiny proportion of the total) will have to pay the full amount, and this won't change under the proposed system. I agree that up-front fees are unfair, and there has been cases where universities will not admit students until they or the LEAs have stumped up the cash. Paying the fees at the same time as the loan is much fairer. The bottom line is, if you want to study at university, you're going to have to pay, whether through taxes paid later or directly.
John, UK

It is disgusting that higher education has become a business David, England

I was lucky enough to be in one of the last intakes given a grant and an LEA funded tuition. I think it is disgusting that higher education has become a business rather than a means for furthering our nation. Those who pursue this form of self improvement will inevitably pay back the cost in the form of higher tax bills.. The government needs to think outside the box on this one and perhaps subsidise core subjects more heavily How many art historians does a country really need to function anyway?
David, England

With fewer courses, fewer uninspired teachers and fewer unacademic students, a lot of money would be freed up to fund those who get some pleasure out of learning.
Jenny, UK

Top-up fees, should be renamed a graduate tax Jessel, Great Britain

Why should the tax payer, some of whom didn't go to university, foot the bill? I feel that those who go to university and benefit from it should pay. This only seems fair and may help weed out the 'Mickey Mouse' degrees and those who think of a university as a 3 year holiday. Top-up fees, should be renamed a graduate tax because essentially it is paid only once the graduate leaves university and can afford to pay. Perhaps maintenance grants should be reintroduced for poor students to help while they are at university.
Jessel, Great Britain

Jessel, you may not have been to university but you rely every day on people who have. What about your doctor, or the teachers teaching your children? Restricting degrees only to those who can afford them will affect everyone in the end.
Ian, UK

Myself and my sister are the only members of my family fortunate enough to go to University. Having taken a gap-year to earn and save money (no foreign excursions for me), followed by myself and my parents taking on large debts, I now have a degree from Cambridge. An extra 9,000 pounds would have simply been too much to bear. I am already paying back what was spent on me through taxation.
Luke, England

What the government is proposing is better than the current system Nick, UK

I want to clear up a common misconception that is reported in the media. It is not the poorest who are affected by tuition fees at the moment, it is the middle income people whose parents can't or won't help them as they are "supposed to". These people lose out. Lower income students receive more assistance from the state. (If my parents lost their jobs I would be better off). The fact is lower income students are put off going to university not because of the actual financial realities, but because of the misconception that they will incur unmanageable debt, an idea fuelled by the media and the opposition parties. Although not perfect, what the government is proposing is better than the current system, and I say this as a student.
Nick, UK

The government is being very short sighted Peter, UK

The government is being very short sighted, and the policy is being used as the only way it can possibly afford its ridiculous target of 50% of school leavers going to university. Much better if proper resources could be targeted at the truly talented from all backgrounds to encourage them into the professions that the country needs. More should also be done with tax breaks to encourage companies and wealthy benefactors to start funding university endowments, giving them greater independence from future political interference.
Peter, UK

The UK is slowly becoming identical to the US. So what's next? No Healthcare unless one can afford it? The Death Sentence perhaps? The rest of Europe insists on keeping universities free, and that's for a reason: It took centuries of civilisation to reach the point where all youngsters who are worth it (i.e. who do their homework) have the right to a good education and a good life, regardless of the financial status of their parents. And now you want to drag us back to the middle-age? No, thanks. If you want to become another star on the US flag that's fine. Just let the rest of us know, and leave the EU
Aristotelis Oikonomou, Athens, Greece

The government should have a reward system Geoff, UK

As part of my studies for my doctorate, I have been teaching part time at my university to fund the �3,000/year fees. Last week as I began to grade their work, I was shocked to discover the true laziness of my class. I am sure some of them do not even bother to attend lectures, or attempt their exercises before doing their graded coursework. The �3,000 fee isn't a tax on learning. It is to weed out those who are wasting their time and money. University isn't a holiday for three years as some would believe. The government should have a reward system: Pay �3,000/year to study. Depending on how well a student performs, and the degree studied, provide them with a refund of up to 100% of the fees paid.
Geoff, UK

This country seems to be willing to pay benefit to young people some of whom have no intention of working, but intends to punish the students who wish to better themselves through education. Starting off life with a huge debt is surely going to be a big deterrent, what if two graduates marry? They could start their married lives off owing upwards of 40,000 pounds. Also, they aren't all studying organic basket weaving - these are the health workers teachers and professionals who will be looking after our future.
Sue, UK

In the US, we've always had to pay for higher education. While this can make it more difficult for poorer students to attend university, those who are motivated do find a way. Scholarships, loans, working part-time. My family had very little money to send four children to university, yet we all went and graduated. You find a way. It's better than having everything handed to you.
Ann, USA

How did Tony Blair pay for his education? Lee, Liverpool

Of course it is a retrograde step. I was able to take my degree with the benefit of the last years of the grant system before loans were introduced. Coming from a working class background, where debt is to be avoided at all costs if at all possible, and being the first (and only) one of my family to go to university there is no way I would have considered further education with the prospect of up to 30 thousand pounds in debts at the end of the course.

I find it strange that a supposed left of centre government, many of whose members themselves benefited from the old grants system to achieve their professional degrees, want to pull the ladder up behind them and ensure that many thousands of lower income families cannot afford to send their children to university because of the fear of running up huge debts. How did Tony Blair pay for his education?
Lee, Liverpool, UK

What about all the students doing courses such as teaching, nursing, medicine etc? I am studying medicine, and effectively committing myself to the NHS for life. For this commitment to the public I am to be charged up to �15000. It is not so bad for me as my pay rate will be pretty good, but what about nurses, teachers etc who are still underpaid. I could go and work in the city, for a much higher wage, and pay the same in tuition fees. This will just lead to increased problems recruiting people to already understaffed areas
Brendan, UK

I am stuck doing the same job I did before entering further education Elizabeth Chambers, England

I feel very angry at the idea of top up fees been increased. I went to University when I was 24 and therefore was eligible for the full student loan. In the three years I attended university the fees were increased yearly. I graduated last year with a first class degree in drama and thirteen thousand pounds worth of debt. I had aspirations to become an actress or broadcaster, I even wanted to do my masters in performance but have been left in the situation I have had to work as a temp and a bar maid to try to cope with my debt. I have had to turn down offers of auditions simply because I cannot afford to take time off of the soul destroying job I am having to do. I hoped my hard work at university would open new doors for me, but I am stuck doing the same job I did before entering further education.
Elizabeth Chambers, England

It is a nonsense that 50% of children should go to university. How many unsuitable candidates drop out? At what expense to the tax payer? If only those who are worthy went to University the Government could pay all the fees and the students could fund their own beer money without the help of the taxpayer. This way perhaps sense would prevail and we may again have plumbers, electricians and joiners.
Jill, England

Given that any decent employer now expects a degree, why isn't higher education treated like high school education? Nobody is expected to pay to send their children to a comprehensive, yet it is obvious that the skills gained in the current curriculum aren't good enough for most occupations. Make it harder for people to drop out of University and thus cut the wastage. After all, we can't all work in supermarkets and shops.
Giles, UK

If people choose to take advantage of the higher education system then they should be willing to pay for it. It may put off those interested in 'Organic Basket Weaving', but we'll just have to accept that.
Chris, UK

This seems to be a serious attempt to put universities on an improved financial footing. Phil Martin, UK

As someone who is hoping to enter university next year, I can understand the problem. But I can also see that there is no easy answer to this issue, whatever the Liberal Democrats or Conservatives may want us to believe. This seems to be a serious attempt to put universities on an improved financial footing. It recognises that more will need to come from taxation as universities benefit us all but also more from students; those who ultimately benefit personally. It has been disappointing to see such a lack of constructive discussion from Opposition politicians who have done little but court short term popularity. The deterrent factor is there but is much less potent than the Lib Dems and other critics of the scheme pretend.
Phil Martin, UK

This country has the best education system in the world Doug, UK

Weird and wonderful taxes are appearing from thin air. Where's the extra cash, that this government has promised to put into education, going? This country has the best education system in the world and turns out some of the most influential brains the world. Let's not ruin everything that still stands.
Doug, UK

Of course it will. This is typical of the UK; it knocks everything which encourages people to improve themselves. Do we want a country where we all work in dead-end jobs and all the 'professions' have to be imported from abroad?
Helen, UK

The Labour party promised in their 2001 election manifesto not to introduce top up fees, so I think this is an absolute disgrace. If the government wants to encourage and invest in higher education, then this is the wrong way of going about it. Students leave university with too much debt already. How on earth does the government think that more debt will encourage a greater take up?
Kathryn Hughes, London, UK

We all need and use the services provided by people with university degrees Vanessa, NZ/UK

The UK only needs to look at what has happened in New Zealand when top-up fees and student loans were introduced. They resulted in a massive 'brain drain' from the country. Meanwhile, there is a huge shortage of teachers, nurses and other health professionals. I know that a university education is good for individuals, but don't people realise that education benefits society? We all need and use the services provided by people with university degrees.
Vanessa, NZ/UK

Of course, they will! So within a very short time, only the kids of the financial elite will be able to study at university.
LB, UK

My sixteen year old daughter is keen to go to University but will not. She has no intention of running up debts of +20k, which would probably take the first five to ten years of her working life to pay off. What chance then has she got to get on the over inflated property ladder? Yes parents can assist, but it is only the rich who will really be able to afford it.
Derek, England

As a lecturer, I am appalled at the low standards of the incoming students and the myriad of silly subjects being offered by universities. I am also appalled by the attitude of my colleagues who are only concerned with research, publishing and outside consulting. Perhaps if students had to contribute toward their education, they would think carefully before, spending three or 4 years taking useless courses, which qualify them for nothing. If parents and students had to pay, perhaps then universities would be forced to hire lectures who can actually teach and who care about their students.
Jo, UK

It is farcical that all courses at all universities should have the same cost Neil, UK

If, as appears to be inevitable, tuition fees are a long-term reality, it is farcical that all courses at all universities should have the same cost, as in reality, they do not all have the same value in terms of career prospects and expected earnings. Taking this fact into account, I support the idea of top-up fees.
Neil, UK

Perhaps Tony Blair, Gordon Brown and the rest would be prepared to cough up �20-30k for their university fees if they believe so strongly that students should pay.
Tom, UK

The main idea behind going to university is to get qualifications for a good job. However, there is also talk of raising the tax on high earners. How will the graduates be able to pay this back, along with higher taxes etc?
Caron, England

We all benefit from the right people going to university. These people get good jobs, earn high incomes and pay more taxes. Perhaps the problem is the number of 'useless' courses and the number of students who drop out before completing the course.
Carol, England

It is really a matter of whether the country wants to invest in our talent pool or not Guy Chapman, UK

Under the present funding arrangements, I would not have gone to university. I was a mature student with independent status and a full grant. I studied electrical engineering, not one of the disciplines that attracts tabloid derision. It is really a matter of whether the country wants to invest in our talent pool or not.
Guy Chapman, UK

I think it is disgusting that the government are even thinking about top-up fees for university students. I was deterred from going to university a few years ago because of the fear of running up so much debt. Are we now living in a country where our government does not care about future generations?
Laura, England

There is not enough tax money to go round Philip Shorter, England

With the government encouraging 1 in 3 young people to go to university, who will pay for it? There is not enough tax money to go round. The government should be cutting the number of degree places and concentrate more resources on students who can get the benefit of the extra funding.
Philip Shorter, England

Of course they will deter a lot of students. One day, Blair and co will wake up to the reality that about 90% of the population does not have thousands of pounds of spare disposable income to support children through university, and that having graduates starting out with �15 - �20k of debt is an absolutely stupid idea. If we could have a grown up debate without the hysteria from certain tabloids, an increase of 5% on income tax for those earning �100k plus could solve this crisis to the benefit of the entire population of the UK.
John C, Bath, England

I hope they will. It is not made clear that the gaining of a degree is not a passport to an exciting career and limitless wealth any more. The value of a degree is falling year by year, and many graduates find themselves struggling to find work, heavily in debt, and unable to use their degree usefully. Rick, UK

Many people's skills don't match those required to do a degree Heather, UK

The rise in fees originates from the pressure caused by more people going to universities, which are expensive institutions to run. Why not cut the bill by restricting universities to doing what suits them best: didactic teaching of traditional academic subjects? High-quality, well-respected vocational qualifications could then be taught as a 'follow-on' from A-levels at local colleges. It's not elitism, it's just a recognition that many people's skills don't match those required to do a degree.
Heather, UK

It's not the fees that are the problem, it is the loan. Yes have fees, and those who want to go will get the money, but give back the grant so students don't leave with huge debts.
Richard Cummings, UK

Fees should be based on the income of those who pay them Joanna, UK

I graduated last June and would've been quite happy to pay for the education I received, but only after I began to receive the benefits from it. This benefit should be paid for when graduates start earning a specific level salary. It's time the government changed the way fees are paid anyway. I had to pay the full amount because my parents were high earners, even though I had no money of my own. Others paid nothing because their parents were on low income. Fees should be based on the income of those who pay it.
Joanna, UK

Students from Third World countries will need to spend a fortune in fees for their degree courses in the UK.
.B Esa, England

If you want a highly motivated, highly educated, flexible workforce you have to be willing to pay for it Vish, UK

Of course they will. I am tired of this country wanting something for nothing. I had to pay fees; my debt runs to over �30k because of university debt and the cost of living in London. If you want a highly motivated, highly educated, flexible workforce you have to be willing to pay for it. Students should not have to live in run down, rat infested housing. They should not have to work all hours on minimum wage to pay for their basic costs. Why should graduates have any loyalty to a country that has made life more difficult for them and seems to want us to be enslaved to banks and loan companies for the rest of our lives?
Vish, UK

The current system of pile-them-high, sell-them-cheap university places redistributes resources (a) from poor families to rich families; (b) from public sector universities to private sector landlords, retailers and pub chains; (c) from universities to other public services with more political clout and (d) from Britain to the US and other countries with seriously competitive universities. How exactly can any of this be thought of as progressive? How could anyone be deterred by a system of fees that has no up-front payment but an income-contingent repayment afterwards? t
John Gardner, UK

We put far too high a price on the cost of education without thinking about its value Lynn, UK

Not only will it deter students but also parents. Our son has just about completed his first year and it has been a bit of a struggle - even with him working when he can. Next year he will move into accommodation outside of the university. We had to pay a large deposit and rent from the beginning of July for a shared house and we are struggling before the second year has even started. If the amount of top-up fees increases, we would seriously have to consider selling our house to send our second son to university We put far too high a price on the cost of education without thinking about its value.
Lynn, UK

With so many companies seeking experience and not just qualifications, who in their right mind would want to go through university knowing that when they leave - regardless of what result they get - they'll end up with around twenty thousand pounds worth of debt on their shoulders and not even be guaranteed a job at the end of it all? If these fees reintroduced, at least give students some kind of incentive to finish their courses.
Ross, UK

People should be prepared to pay for education, post A-level Alex S, UK

We need to get away from the outdated mindset that an extended education should come either free or at a reduced cost. People should be prepared to pay for education, post A-level. You want the best? Fork out for it. This is how it works in so many other aspects of modern life. I don't see why it shouldn't apply to higher education. Personally I don't think top-up fees will deter a large percentage of students. However, they are likely to determine which universities they choose. Some may be prepared to take the pain of higher debt for the longer term advantage that an education from a prestigious university gives them, whilst others will look at it in terms of short-term gain.
Alex S, UK

University is expensive enough as it is; the very nature of living away from home makes it so. And with the abolition of grants, many students now find themselves over �10,000 in debt at the end a degree course. With top-up fees you'd add another �9K or �12K on to this; a substantial debt before you've even started earning. How can this not put some people off?
Will Glover, UK