Robert Jenrick. Nothing more than a polished 30p Lee. Educated beyond his intelligence.
Universities are in the business of making money. They do not decide who is allowed to come in-that is the job of the Govt and the Home Office. They do not decide who is entitled to come with them. Again, that is the job of the Govt and the Home Office. Finally, Universities have absolutely no say on who stays in the UK at the end of their courses. Again, that is the preserve of the Govt and the Home Office.
Yet again, on immigration, this Govt flails around blaming everyone else for their own failure to do their job.
They provide Unis with about 42 billion of income, and also spend money in the economy. Although as I said on the other thread their dependants is are an issue.
Our Universities are unlike Universities anywhere else in the World.
They are privately-owned (unlike the rest of the World, where Unis are almost always owned by country or State).
They almost all have Charitable status. Which means they do not contribute to the Economy in the same way as other businesses.
They have the best of all worlds. Privately-owned, charitable status, massive public funding. Yet they get to keep their profits, and also keep their profits secret. Because over the last 30 years Universities have totally changed, both in number and income.
A typical large University has 20,000 undergraduates and 10,000 postgraduates.
Those 20,000 undergrads. Take an average of, say, £10,000 p.a (£9k-odd for UK, more for foreign students). That is £200 million a year in fees. Most of which is funded by the taxpayer. Before we get to the complex funding arrangements for various postgrads.
I couldnt dispute any of that, I just dont see why we would include them in the figures. The increasing number of dependants is completely different.
Robert Jenrick. Nothing more than a polished 30p Lee. Educated beyond his intelligence.
Universities are in the business of making money. They do not decide who is allowed to come in-that is the job of the Govt and the Home Office. They do not decide who is entitled to come with them. Again, that is the job of the Govt and the Home Office. Finally, Universities have absolutely no say on who stays in the UK at the end of their courses. Again, that is the preserve of the Govt and the Home Office.
Yet again, on immigration, this Govt flails around blaming everyone else for their own failure to do their job.
They provide Unis with about 42 billion of income, and also spend money in the economy. Although as I said on the other thread their dependants is are an issue.
Our Universities are unlike Universities anywhere else in the World.
They are privately-owned (unlike the rest of the World, where Unis are almost always owned by country or State).
They almost all have Charitable status. Which means they do not contribute to the Economy in the same way as other businesses.
They have the best of all worlds. Privately-owned, charitable status, massive public funding. Yet they get to keep their profits, and also keep their profits secret. Because over the last 30 years Universities have totally changed, both in number and income.
A typical large University has 20,000 undergraduates and 10,000 postgraduates.
Those 20,000 undergrads. Take an average of, say, £10,000 p.a (£9k-odd for UK, more for foreign students). That is £200 million a year in fees. Most of which is funded by the taxpayer. Before we get to the complex funding arrangements for various postgrads.
I couldnt dispute any of that, I just dont see why we would include them in the figures. The increasing number of dependants is completely different.
There has been an explosion of number of Dependants via this route.
The "crackdown"? The devil is in the detail. No changes until next year. PhD students to be exempt from this, as well as various other exemptions.
And there is no reliable data in relation to numbers using the degree/time spent here to utilise legal routes to remain.
Robert Jenrick. Nothing more than a polished 30p Lee. Educated beyond his intelligence.
Universities are in the business of making money. They do not decide who is allowed to come in-that is the job of the Govt and the Home Office. They do not decide who is entitled to come with them. Again, that is the job of the Govt and the Home Office. Finally, Universities have absolutely no say on who stays in the UK at the end of their courses. Again, that is the preserve of the Govt and the Home Office.
Yet again, on immigration, this Govt flails around blaming everyone else for their own failure to do their job.
They provide Unis with about 42 billion of income, and also spend money in the economy. Although as I said on the other thread their dependants is are an issue.
Our Universities are unlike Universities anywhere else in the World.
They are privately-owned (unlike the rest of the World, where Unis are almost always owned by country or State).
They almost all have Charitable status. Which means they do not contribute to the Economy in the same way as other businesses.
They have the best of all worlds. Privately-owned, charitable status, massive public funding. Yet they get to keep their profits, and also keep their profits secret. Because over the last 30 years Universities have totally changed, both in number and income.
A typical large University has 20,000 undergraduates and 10,000 postgraduates.
Those 20,000 undergrads. Take an average of, say, £10,000 p.a (£9k-odd for UK, more for foreign students). That is £200 million a year in fees. Most of which is funded by the taxpayer. Before we get to the complex funding arrangements for various postgrads.
I couldnt dispute any of that, I just dont see why we would include them in the figures. The increasing number of dependants is completely different.
There has been an explosion of number of Dependants via this route.
The "crackdown"? The devil is in the detail. No changes until next year. PhD students to be exempt from this, as well as various other exemptions.
And there is no reliable data in relation to numbers using the degree/time spent here to utilise legal routes to remain.
Why wouldnt you just put an end to visas for dependants?
Robert Jenrick. Nothing more than a polished 30p Lee. Educated beyond his intelligence.
Universities are in the business of making money. They do not decide who is allowed to come in-that is the job of the Govt and the Home Office. They do not decide who is entitled to come with them. Again, that is the job of the Govt and the Home Office. Finally, Universities have absolutely no say on who stays in the UK at the end of their courses. Again, that is the preserve of the Govt and the Home Office.
Yet again, on immigration, this Govt flails around blaming everyone else for their own failure to do their job.
They provide Unis with about 42 billion of income, and also spend money in the economy. Although as I said on the other thread their dependants is are an issue.
Our Universities are unlike Universities anywhere else in the World.
They are privately-owned (unlike the rest of the World, where Unis are almost always owned by country or State).
They almost all have Charitable status. Which means they do not contribute to the Economy in the same way as other businesses.
They have the best of all worlds. Privately-owned, charitable status, massive public funding. Yet they get to keep their profits, and also keep their profits secret. Because over the last 30 years Universities have totally changed, both in number and income.
A typical large University has 20,000 undergraduates and 10,000 postgraduates.
Those 20,000 undergrads. Take an average of, say, £10,000 p.a (£9k-odd for UK, more for foreign students). That is £200 million a year in fees. Most of which is funded by the taxpayer. Before we get to the complex funding arrangements for various postgrads.
I couldnt dispute any of that, I just dont see why we would include them in the figures. The increasing number of dependants is completely different.
There has been an explosion of number of Dependants via this route.
The "crackdown"? The devil is in the detail. No changes until next year. PhD students to be exempt from this, as well as various other exemptions.
And there is no reliable data in relation to numbers using the degree/time spent here to utilise legal routes to remain.
Why wouldnt you just put an end to visas for dependants?
A whole host of reasons. It is 1 thing stopping Dependants of someone doing their first degree.
And quite another in relation to a PhD student, who will be here for 3 years, often carrying out important and/or lucrative (and often funded) research. Without those people, the Universities cease to exist.
Robert Jenrick. Nothing more than a polished 30p Lee. Educated beyond his intelligence.
Universities are in the business of making money. They do not decide who is allowed to come in-that is the job of the Govt and the Home Office. They do not decide who is entitled to come with them. Again, that is the job of the Govt and the Home Office. Finally, Universities have absolutely no say on who stays in the UK at the end of their courses. Again, that is the preserve of the Govt and the Home Office.
Yet again, on immigration, this Govt flails around blaming everyone else for their own failure to do their job.
They provide Unis with about 42 billion of income, and also spend money in the economy. Although as I said on the other thread their dependants is are an issue.
Our Universities are unlike Universities anywhere else in the World.
They are privately-owned (unlike the rest of the World, where Unis are almost always owned by country or State).
They almost all have Charitable status. Which means they do not contribute to the Economy in the same way as other businesses.
They have the best of all worlds. Privately-owned, charitable status, massive public funding. Yet they get to keep their profits, and also keep their profits secret. Because over the last 30 years Universities have totally changed, both in number and income.
A typical large University has 20,000 undergraduates and 10,000 postgraduates.
Those 20,000 undergrads. Take an average of, say, £10,000 p.a (£9k-odd for UK, more for foreign students). That is £200 million a year in fees. Most of which is funded by the taxpayer. Before we get to the complex funding arrangements for various postgrads.
I couldnt dispute any of that, I just dont see why we would include them in the figures. The increasing number of dependants is completely different.
There has been an explosion of number of Dependants via this route.
The "crackdown"? The devil is in the detail. No changes until next year. PhD students to be exempt from this, as well as various other exemptions.
And there is no reliable data in relation to numbers using the degree/time spent here to utilise legal routes to remain.
Why wouldnt you just put an end to visas for dependants?
A whole host of reasons. It is 1 thing stopping Dependants of someone doing their first degree.
And quite another in relation to a PhD student, who will be here for 3 years, often carrying out important and/or lucrative (and often funded) research. Without those people, the Universities cease to exist.
Doesnt the fact that there were only 16,000 in 2019 show that it is unlikely to make a huge difference.
Robert Jenrick. Nothing more than a polished 30p Lee. Educated beyond his intelligence.
Universities are in the business of making money. They do not decide who is allowed to come in-that is the job of the Govt and the Home Office. They do not decide who is entitled to come with them. Again, that is the job of the Govt and the Home Office. Finally, Universities have absolutely no say on who stays in the UK at the end of their courses. Again, that is the preserve of the Govt and the Home Office.
Yet again, on immigration, this Govt flails around blaming everyone else for their own failure to do their job.
They provide Unis with about 42 billion of income, and also spend money in the economy. Although as I said on the other thread their dependants is are an issue.
Our Universities are unlike Universities anywhere else in the World.
They are privately-owned (unlike the rest of the World, where Unis are almost always owned by country or State).
They almost all have Charitable status. Which means they do not contribute to the Economy in the same way as other businesses.
They have the best of all worlds. Privately-owned, charitable status, massive public funding. Yet they get to keep their profits, and also keep their profits secret. Because over the last 30 years Universities have totally changed, both in number and income.
A typical large University has 20,000 undergraduates and 10,000 postgraduates.
Those 20,000 undergrads. Take an average of, say, £10,000 p.a (£9k-odd for UK, more for foreign students). That is £200 million a year in fees. Most of which is funded by the taxpayer. Before we get to the complex funding arrangements for various postgrads.
I couldnt dispute any of that, I just dont see why we would include them in the figures. The increasing number of dependants is completely different.
There has been an explosion of number of Dependants via this route. As I said earlier The "crackdown"? The devil is in the detail. No changes until next year. PhD students to be exempt from this, as well as various other exemptions.
And there is no reliable data in relation to numbers using the degree/time spent here to utilise legal routes to remain.
Why wouldnt you just put an end to visas for dependants?
A whole host of reasons. It is 1 thing stopping Dependants of someone doing their first degree.
And quite another in relation to a PhD student, who will be here for 3 years, often carrying out important and/or lucrative (and often funded) research. Without those people, the Universities cease to exist.
As I said earlier, I dont think they should include students.
Although when calculating a net figure, shouldnt you take into account those that left. So if you were calculating the net figure for students, wouldnt you deduct the number that left this year after completing their studies, from the number that arrived. So if the same number that arrived this year, compared to the number that left, then the net figure would be nil.
Robert Jenrick. Nothing more than a polished 30p Lee. Educated beyond his intelligence.
Universities are in the business of making money. They do not decide who is allowed to come in-that is the job of the Govt and the Home Office. They do not decide who is entitled to come with them. Again, that is the job of the Govt and the Home Office. Finally, Universities have absolutely no say on who stays in the UK at the end of their courses. Again, that is the preserve of the Govt and the Home Office.
Yet again, on immigration, this Govt flails around blaming everyone else for their own failure to do their job.
They provide Unis with about 42 billion of income, and also spend money in the economy. Although as I said on the other thread their dependants is are an issue.
Our Universities are unlike Universities anywhere else in the World.
They are privately-owned (unlike the rest of the World, where Unis are almost always owned by country or State).
They almost all have Charitable status. Which means they do not contribute to the Economy in the same way as other businesses.
They have the best of all worlds. Privately-owned, charitable status, massive public funding. Yet they get to keep their profits, and also keep their profits secret. Because over the last 30 years Universities have totally changed, both in number and income.
A typical large University has 20,000 undergraduates and 10,000 postgraduates.
Those 20,000 undergrads. Take an average of, say, £10,000 p.a (£9k-odd for UK, more for foreign students). That is £200 million a year in fees. Most of which is funded by the taxpayer. Before we get to the complex funding arrangements for various postgrads.
I couldnt dispute any of that, I just dont see why we would include them in the figures. The increasing number of dependants is completely different.
There has been an explosion of number of Dependants via this route.
The "crackdown"? The devil is in the detail. No changes until next year. PhD students to be exempt from this, as well as various other exemptions.
And there is no reliable data in relation to numbers using the degree/time spent here to utilise legal routes to remain.
Why wouldnt you just put an end to visas for dependants?
A whole host of reasons. It is 1 thing stopping Dependants of someone doing their first degree.
And quite another in relation to a PhD student, who will be here for 3 years, often carrying out important and/or lucrative (and often funded) research. Without those people, the Universities cease to exist.
Doesnt the fact that there were only 16,000 in 2019 show that it is unlikely to make a huge difference.
You are assuming things remain the same. When they do not.
Research rankings are vital for Universities to attract students. In addition, the abolition of Freedom of Movement means that many more people now have to be documented as Migrants.
Fact remains that this explosion in numbers is ridiculous.
Robert Jenrick. Nothing more than a polished 30p Lee. Educated beyond his intelligence.
Universities are in the business of making money. They do not decide who is allowed to come in-that is the job of the Govt and the Home Office. They do not decide who is entitled to come with them. Again, that is the job of the Govt and the Home Office. Finally, Universities have absolutely no say on who stays in the UK at the end of their courses. Again, that is the preserve of the Govt and the Home Office.
Yet again, on immigration, this Govt flails around blaming everyone else for their own failure to do their job.
They provide Unis with about 42 billion of income, and also spend money in the economy. Although as I said on the other thread their dependants is are an issue.
Our Universities are unlike Universities anywhere else in the World.
They are privately-owned (unlike the rest of the World, where Unis are almost always owned by country or State).
They almost all have Charitable status. Which means they do not contribute to the Economy in the same way as other businesses.
They have the best of all worlds. Privately-owned, charitable status, massive public funding. Yet they get to keep their profits, and also keep their profits secret. Because over the last 30 years Universities have totally changed, both in number and income.
A typical large University has 20,000 undergraduates and 10,000 postgraduates.
Those 20,000 undergrads. Take an average of, say, £10,000 p.a (£9k-odd for UK, more for foreign students). That is £200 million a year in fees. Most of which is funded by the taxpayer. Before we get to the complex funding arrangements for various postgrads.
I couldnt dispute any of that, I just dont see why we would include them in the figures. The increasing number of dependants is completely different.
There has been an explosion of number of Dependants via this route.
The "crackdown"? The devil is in the detail. No changes until next year. PhD students to be exempt from this, as well as various other exemptions.
And there is no reliable data in relation to numbers using the degree/time spent here to utilise legal routes to remain.
Why wouldnt you just put an end to visas for dependants?
A whole host of reasons. It is 1 thing stopping Dependants of someone doing their first degree.
And quite another in relation to a PhD student, who will be here for 3 years, often carrying out important and/or lucrative (and often funded) research. Without those people, the Universities cease to exist.
Doesnt the fact that there were only 16,000 in 2019 show that it is unlikely to make a huge difference.
You are assuming things remain the same. When they do not.
Research rankings are vital for Universities to attract students. In addition, the abolition of Freedom of Movement means that many more people now have to be documented as Migrants.
Fact remains that this explosion in numbers is ridiculous.
I dont understand why the dependants figure would explode.
Rishi Sunak eyeing major Cabinet reshuffle as Tory members pan his top team of ministers
A new poll by the Tory bible Conservative Home shows a record number of Cabinet ministers now receiving net disapproval among Mr Sunak's own party members.
Last month only Environment Secretary Therese Coffey saw more Tory members disapprove of her than approve, however just one month on she has been joined by no fewer than six other senior Tories.
Michael Gove, Grant Shapps, Andrew Mitchell, Jeremy Hunt and Robert Jenrick have all dipped well into net negative approval among Tory members.
Rishi Sunak's own popularity has halved since last month among Conservative Party members, dropping from 47.4 to 21.6.
Comments
The increasing number of dependants is completely different.
The "crackdown"? The devil is in the detail. No changes until next year. PhD students to be exempt from this, as well as various other exemptions.
And there is no reliable data in relation to numbers using the degree/time spent here to utilise legal routes to remain.
And quite another in relation to a PhD student, who will be here for 3 years, often carrying out important and/or lucrative (and often funded) research. Without those people, the Universities cease to exist.
Although when calculating a net figure, shouldnt you take into account those that left.
So if you were calculating the net figure for students, wouldnt you deduct the number that left this year after completing their studies, from the number that arrived.
So if the same number that arrived this year, compared to the number that left, then the net figure would be nil.
Research rankings are vital for Universities to attract students. In addition, the abolition of Freedom of Movement means that many more people now have to be documented as Migrants.
Fact remains that this explosion in numbers is ridiculous.
https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/uknews/arlene-foster-says-dup-could-form-a-coalition-with-labour-there-are-good-relationships/ar-AA1bLAo7?ocid=msedgntp&cvid=54e50ceedf8f4cbe8bb3b6430a66a473&ei=44
A new poll by the Tory bible Conservative Home shows a record number of Cabinet ministers now receiving net disapproval among Mr Sunak's own party members.
Last month only Environment Secretary Therese Coffey saw more Tory members disapprove of her than approve, however just one month on she has been joined by no fewer than six other senior Tories.
Michael Gove, Grant Shapps, Andrew Mitchell, Jeremy Hunt and Robert Jenrick have all dipped well into net negative approval among Tory members.
Rishi Sunak's own popularity has halved since last month among Conservative Party members, dropping from 47.4 to 21.6.
https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/uknews/rishi-sunak-eyeing-major-cabinet-reshuffle-as-tory-members-pan-his-top-team-of-ministers/ar-AA1bRSyI?ocid=msedgntp&cvid=26b1215dfa104d1083af40d7a8d5aa46&ei=74
https://uk.yahoo.com/news/brexit-environment-energy-bills-hard-050025321.html
https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/uknews/labour-on-course-for-landslide-election-victory-megapoll-suggests/ar-AA1ceGeV?ocid=msedgntp&cvid=d875d49aeba745138437f98566a6ee41&ei=16