Tony Blair launched the General Election from the backdrop of a carefully selected secondary school.

Labour thinks it has done a good job in primary schools and wants to make secondary education the heart of its campaign for re-election.

But how often will we see the prime minister posing for photo-opportunities with university students?

I make no apology for returning to the subject as - to judge by your e-mail responses - it's an issue you feel strongly about

I suspect it may not be too often as the issue of student debt could yet prove a tricky one for the government.

The foot-and-mouth delay to the election means that the campaign is now taking place just as many universities are expelling, or threatening to expel, students for non-payment of tuition fees.

Although this was the subject of last week's column, I make no apology for returning to it as - to judge by your e-mail responses - it's an issue you feel strongly about.

Also, as we're in an election period, I thought I'd allow a rare shaft of democracy to fall on this column and let you have your say.

There was no consensus in your responses but, as I would expect from such an intelligent readership, you raised several points I had not considered.

There was one group of you who clearly felt very strongly that university education should have remained free for all students.

'Relative poverty'

One lady wrote to tell me that she had taken her degree when full grants were still available.

She added that, as she came from a background of "relative poverty" and was brought up to avoid getting into debt, there was no way she would be able to enter higher education today.

While there were many others whose main concern was for the students, others saw wider implications for universities.

One academic wrote to say that the constant squeeze on university funding is leading to the rationalisation of university departments with smaller ones being closed or merged with larger departments.

The result, she says, is that students are "herded into large, less specialised departments" which are often quite different from the ones they applied to.

'Falling apart'

Another view from the lecturers' side accused the political parties and the media of playing "an enjoyable game of discussing who will or cannot pay", while leaving the entire university system to fall apart.

If graduates felt some responsibility to do something with the knowledge and expertise they had acquired, they wouldn't expect the good life to be handed to them on a plate

View of a column reader

He feared the need for investment in higher education was being neglected because of the row over who should pay.

There was also a plea for consideration of the plight of graduate research students.

One lecturer, from a top university, wrote that it is getting much harder to recruit research students because of the level of debt amongst new graduates.

With graduate student grant levels at around �6,000 - �9,000 a year, he says, very few graduates are willing to risk increasing their debt burden for a further three or four years while they do a PhD.

'Stop whinging!'

There was also quite another side to the issue with many of you writing to say students should stop whinging about their debts.

Perhaps not surprisingly many American readers showed little sympathy. After all, as they pointed out, students in the USA must pay much higher fees to earn a degree.

One American wrote saying he had had enough of the "bleeding heart story" of British students.

In the US, he wrote, students did all kinds of work, including cleaning toilets, to pay their way through university.

What was more, he added, they got on with it, and smiled, unlike the "spoiled" British students.

Another view from across the Atlantic came from a British student currently studying in medical school in the United States. He expects to be about $80,000 in debt when he finally graduates and says that is about average for medical students at his university.

His view is that the real question is how much you want that degree.

As he put it: "If graduates felt some responsibility to do something with the knowledge and expertise they had acquired, they wouldn't expect the good life to be handed to them on a plate".

Part-time work

Another defender of fees - this time from a British university - said that, if students worked 15 hours a week and a bit more during the holidays, even the poorest of them could finance their studies.

This writer argued that students are the ultimate beneficiaries of higher education so they should pay for at least a part of it.

So, it seems from your correspondence, that there is real vigour left in this debate.

With the political parties all offering something different on the issue of student support and university funding, there really is no excuse for those who say they are already bored by the election.

The message for the politicians is clear - just get the debate onto students and universities and we'll have an argumentative and exciting hustings for the next few weeks.