Students have opposed plans for �3,000 per year in tuition fees

Students have given a cautious welcome to the Conservatives' proposal to scrap tuition fees - and they have warned the government it could be heading for an "embarrassing defeat".

Students say that the Conservatives' announcement now leaves the government isolated in its defence of tuition fees, which will cost students up to �3,000 per year.

But university chiefs have warned that the stopping fees could leave them with less funding - and scrapping expansion plans would leave this country falling behind international competitors.

"Abolishing tuition fees removes a financial barrier that deters many from going to university and that can only be a good thing," said Penny Hollings, national secretary of the National Union of Students.

But they warned that they wanted more details of the Conservatives' bigger picture on student funding and warned against cutting costs elsewhere.

Students have campaigned against tuition fees, which they say contribute to problems with debt.

Vote winner

And they have highlighted that getting rid of fees is likely to be well-received by students and their families - suggesting that the Conservatives have outflanked the government on a policy which has continued to prove difficult - not least with their own backbenchers.

"The Conservative party has correctly identified just how unpopular tuition fees have been and the catastrophic effect that top-up fees would have," said Ms Hollings.

But university vice-chancellors were less enthusiastic about the proposals, suggesting that it would leave them with even less money, when they already faced serious financial problems.

Universities UK, representing university chiefs, argued that the Conservatives' plans to drop the target for 50% of young people to go to university would mean falling behind other countries - with the poorest students most likely to be those who would not get a chance to enter higher education.

"At first sight, the Conservatives propose to deprive universities of a much-needed source of funding to relieve middle-class students from paying fees; the poorest students are already exempt so they would not benefit," said Roderick Floud, president of Universities UK.

"Abolishing the 50% target would save little money in the short run and risks leaving the UK lagging behind other countries in the world knowledge economy. It also risks depriving many bright students from poorer backgrounds of the opportunities they deserve."