The system needed reforming before the credit crisis, or any of the rest of it, began. The thing is that most people are opposed to any kind of cuts, at any time, the Government probably felt that they had a greater chance of getting away with the reforms under the guise of the current economic mess.

---

What really pisses me off is that the anti-fees people that I know (which is, most of the people who I am friends with), are talking about how these protests being ignored are a bad day for democracy. The protests had what, 50,000 people? It's the Government's job to deal with the long term needs of the 61 million other people that live in the country.

I'm just glad that we've finally got a Government in place that actually does that.. you know, work for the 61 million, rather than just who made the most noise, which was what Labour mostly did for the past 12 years.

Yeah, I couldn't imagine he was for Tuiton fees rising.   I mean, he's a figurehead, figureheads don't tend to be for anything unpopular... plus he always seemed pretty "Common man friendly".

The government gives the royal family money right?  Has anyone looked at nicking that a bit?  Things like that and nicking their own pay is the stuff you wish would be done just for ceremony but never is.

A US congressman makes $174,000.  I'd like to see that dropped to $100,000.

Yeah that was pretty dumb, but Prince Charles is pretty unpopular though, he lost popularity after Princess Diana left him and he's been a sort of punching bag, not fair but its how it is.

I don't actually think the royal family are allowed to pass actual comment on any Government policy - so we shouldn't technically know if he's for or against (I know this is true of the monarch, I'm not sure if it extends to other members).

Here's an idea... why don't we just get rid of the royal family in its entirety? Buckingham Palace is essentially the world's largest council house, anyway. And we'd also save money in other areas (for example, when the Government wants to erect wind turbines, they have to pay money to the Royals for the right to use the land.)

the bbc was saying it could be raised to maximum 9k pounds a year(with the assertion that almost all schools would be nowhere near that).  this doesnt seem like much of a problem at all, just some bums who want everything free. 

I'd definitly do a cost/benefit analysis on them.

They do help tourism though and are pretty useful as "useless" heads of State.  Can send them to events you don't want to send real politicians too.  Most countries are more excited and lean towards Britain if the Queen shows up then if Cameron shows up.

They might actually more then make up their fees all things combined.  Worth looking in to for sure though.

Those students deserve no sympathy, this isn't the way to prove your point. Attacking innocent people.

You'd also put thousands of people out of jobs, save money sure but a lot of people work for the Royal family.

I think the tuitions fees rising has the potential to be very bad for education. I haven't yet heard of any workable alternatives though.

I think the police need to rethink their strategy for dealing with protesters, because I  think kettleing just winds people up and make them more violent. I'm sure there were people there just to cause violence though and who don't care about the fees rise. 

Anyway I have a essay I need to finish XD

Edit: On the Prince attack thing, why did they drive them right through the middle of a riot?

This is what governments do.  It would make a lot more sense for the UK government and all governments to end any relation to universities.  Governments just make the university system worse.  Get the government out of higher education.