Fees split Russell 17

Staff still unhappy about pay, students alarmed at the prospect of fees and vice chancellors squeezed in the middle. Funding pressure built up as v-cs gathered in London this week to discuss the budget.

The Russell Group of universities is unlikely to develop a policy on top-up fees following last week's budget statement.

There had been speculation that the 17-strong group, which includes the leading research institutions, might go for safety in numbers in introducing top-up fees, moving as a group in 1998. But, according one vice chancellor this week, there is no common stance.

Sir Graeme Davies, principal of Glasgow University, said:"Iam aware that some are thinking about fees and I know that others are not. Ihave made it quite clear on a number of occasions that top-up fees are not on the agenda at Glasgow."

The speculation had developed after last week's budget reduced some of the cuts made in the 1995 statement. This move ended any likelihood of the Committee of Vice Chancellors and Principals, which met this week, supporting an across-the-system entry levy for new students.

But vice chancellors were expecting to receive legal advice at the meeting on how to introduce fees.

Birmingham University is considering the introduction of fees in 1998. Vice chancellor Maxwell Irvine will ask the university council at its January meeting to decide if the option should be kept open. A spokesman said that if the council found that it was prudent to make provision to charge fees in the future, appropriate words would be inserted in the student prospectus.

The issue remains high on many vice chancellors' agendas. James Wright, vice chancellor of Newcastle University, said the university would not abandon consideration of top-up fees, as the financial relief was minor and cuts for future years were still considerable.

He believed most vice chancellors did not want top-up fees because of the tension they would create in the sector. Some opposed in principle, while others were hamstrung by their institution's market position. Top-up fees would lead to a two-tier system and students paying fees would be subsidising those who did not. "It would be an extremely messy system and would therefore create all sorts of problems," he said.

Sir Derek Roberts, provost of University College London, said the budget had not changed anything for his institution because no decisions about fees had yet been made, but added that the issue was at "the back of everybody's mind".

If and when fees became a possibility, he said, UCL would need to give early warning to prospective students.

* The CVCP has been urged to join forces with bodies such as the Association of Colleges to fight proposed changes to the Teachers' Superannuation Scheme.

Peter Knight, vice chancellor of the University of Central England, told yesterday's meeting that the government was altering the scheme for political reasons.

He said the "strongest possible representations" should be made to both the Government and the Opposition to express dissatisfaction with the proposal.

"It is less legitimate for the Government to interfere with the provisions of the pension scheme in this way as they are by no means funding all the staff who are covered by the scheme," he said.

The changes are due to be implemented from April 1.