来源：《卫报》
原文刊登日期：2022年3月3日
Sir Philip Augar’s review of post-18 education in England was commissioned by then prime minister Theresa May in 2018. Four years later, the government’s response is finally in. But the reforms it unveiled last week are mainly about saving the Treasury money, rather than students. They are also shamelessly, and calculatedly, regressive.
2018年，菲利普·奥格爵士受时任英国首相特蕾莎·梅委托，对英格兰成人教育进行了评估。四年后，政府的回应终于来了。但上周公布的改革主要是为了节省财政部的钱，而不是为了学生。改革措施还无耻地、精心算计地有利于富人。
Although it talks a good game on adult and further education, the government’s policy priority has always been to slash the amount of university graduate debt that is never paid back – and for which the Treasury is on the hook. It has thus extended from 30 to 40 years the period in which loan repayments must be made, and substantially lowered the salary threshold at which money starts to be paid back. The number of graduates required to pay back their loan in full is expected to rise from under a quarter to more than half.
尽管政府在成人教育和继续教育方面说得很好，但政府的政策重点始终是大幅削减从未偿还的大学毕业生债务总额，而这些债务是财政部要承担的。因此，偿还贷款的期限从30年延长到40年，并大大降低了开始偿还贷款的工资门槛。需要全额偿还贷款的毕业生人数预计将从不到四分之一上升到一半以上。
In partial compensation, high interest rates levied on loans will be cut. But this move will overwhelmingly benefit high-earning graduates. The Institute for Fiscal Studies has estimated that, overall, the changes will save the Treasury £2.3bn for each university cohort. This is money that will be coming from graduates on extremely modest salaries who already have house prices and meagre pensions to worry about.
作为部分补偿，将降低贷款的高利率。但这一举措将极大地惠及高收入毕业生。财政研究所估计，总体而言，这些改革将使财政部为每届大学毕业生少花23亿英镑。这些钱本属于那些薪水极低的毕业生，他们之前已经要为高房价和微薄的养老金而担心。
The regressive approach is compounded by the government’s apparent aspiration to reintroduce minimum GCSE and A-level entry requirements for university – a move that would further entrench social inequalities in educational attainment. A consultation has also been launched on how to deal with “poor-quality” courses that fail to deliver well-paid graduate jobs. This looks like a backdoor route to reintroducing caps on student numbers in some areas, as well as a licence for vulgar judgments on what constitutes the “value” of university learning.
政府明显希望重新引入最低GCSE和A-level考试成绩作为大学入学要求，这一做法将进一步加深教育成就方面的社会不平等，从而加剧降低学生贷款利率这种有利于富人的做法。关于如何应对“低质量”课程的咨询也已启动，所谓“低质量”课程指的是那些无法为毕业生提供高薪工作的课程。这看起来像是在某些地区重新引入学生人数上限的后门，同时也是对大学学习的“价值”进行低俗评判的许可证。
It all amounts to a stealthy and painful Whitehall squeeze on the higher education sector: the net effect of the financial reforms will be to make the prospect of a university education appreciably less attractive to some, and more of a perceived gamble.
这一切无异于白厅对高等教育部门的一种隐秘而痛苦的削减资金：金融改革的净效应将使大学教育的前景对一些人来说吸引力明显减弱，而更像是一场赌博。
This is the intention. The government wants fewer young people to do degrees and more to consider further education colleges, apprenticeships and vocational training as viable alternatives. The Augar review itself called for a rebalancing of this kind. But notwithstanding the welcome proposal of a lifelong loan entitlement for non-graduates from 2025, nothing like enough money is being spent to reverse the impact of a decade of savage cuts to the further education sector. Instead, the government is taking the dismal but cheaper option of upping disincentives to take the academic route. The only true winner from the government’s response to the Augar review is the Treasury.
这就是意图。政府希望更少的年轻人攻读学位，更多的人考虑继续教育学院、学徒制和职业培训作为可行的选择。奥格尔报告本身就呼吁这种再平衡。但是，尽管政府提出了从2025年起为非大学毕业生提供终身贷款的提议，但这一提议并没有足够的资金来扭转十年来对继续教育部门的大幅削减所造成的影响。相反，政府采取了一种差劲但成本更低的选择，即加大对走学术路径的抑制力度。政府对奥加尔报告的回应中唯一真正的赢家是财政部。