STUDENT representatives in Southampton have today vowed to continue fighting against university tuition top-up fees after the government narrowly won a House of Commons vote to introduce them.
In what was the smallest majority of Tony Blair's premiership, the government last night scraped through the vote on its Bill to introduce top-up fees of up to £3,000 a year, by just five votes.
But students in the city, concerned that it will create an elitist system of higher education, have called for more concessions to be made before they consider supporting the government.
John Walsh, Southampton University's Student Union education spokesman, said he was "angry and bitter", claiming that the government had gone against its manifesto pledge not to introduce the fees.
He said: "I feel cheated because there were so many abstentions. I feel a lot of the people on the benches were not listening to the speeches being made, because they had already made their decisions.
"It was a manifesto pledge not to introduce this. They've not been the government we voted for them to be.
"The five votes is a huge problem for the government. We will continue to fight.
"If we don't get what we want by the third reading, we are already working to lobby the Lords over it."
Southampton Institute's Student Union president Ben Craig reflected the same frustrations that the government had gone against a manifesto pledge, and called for strict review mechanisms to be introduced.
He said: "The worrying effect on student hardship is now paramount.
"We need to ensure that the government commits to the office of fair access making sure that class difference in university is dealt with.
"There also needs to be a concession made to ensure that review mechanisms stay in place.
"The cap stands at £3,000, but in 2010 the cap must stand or we open the floodgates, where universities can charge anything up to and in excess of £10,000."
The government says the fees are necessary as universities are seriously under-funded and are facing a £10 billion shortfall.
But many are concerned the new system means access to higher education will be based mainly on the ability to pay.
Despite a huge working majority of 165 MPs, the government won the vote by only five, after 72 'rebel' Labour MPs voted against their own government.
Southampton University's vice-chancellor Professor Bill Wakeham welcomed last night's result and hoped that there would be no dilution of the proposals.
He said: "The implications for universities had the vote gone the other way would have been quite profound.
"We recognise the concerns of students about future debts, but the evidence from other countries where such schemes have been introduced is that patterns of applications to higher education remain unaltered.
"The government's proposals go a long way to addressing the fear of debt that might deter the poorest students.
"While it is a step in the right direction, the Bill does not completely close the acknowledged funding gap facing higher education which must still be addressed."
Top-up fees are now likely to be introduced in 2006, with students stating to pay back the fees once they have graduated and are earning a minimum of £15,000 per year.
HAMPSHIRE MPs were split along party lines last night as Tony Blair survived the Labour revolt.
Opposition MP immediately branded the result an "utter humiliation". Fareham Tory MP Mark Hoban, who voted against top-up fees, said: "The Prime Minister is in crisis."
Sandra Gidley, Lib Dem MP for Romsey, said she was "extremely disappointed" the government had not been defeated, adding: "This issue will not go away."
Julian Lewis, Conservative MP for New Forest East, who voted against the Bill, said the government's decision to expand the number of university places was flawed.
Mark Oaten, Liberal Democrat MP for Winchester, said he was worried that students would be burdened with huge debts and admitted the PM had suffered because of the slender victory.
But Southampton Itchen MP John Denham said it was a "good package" for students.
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article