University was treated here less as a ladder of opportunity than as a holding pen: Yes won by nearly five to one, while every posted argument came from its side. The result was a rout, but the more revealing fact is the complete silence of No voters.
The floor’s most-respected Yes case attacked both value and destination, calling degrees “pointless” when they lead nowhere and describing university as “just a way to delay being a grown up”. The next-ranked arguments were more constructive, demanding “wider apprenticeships and support to move into work” rather than simply closing the academic route.
The absent No case leaves the winning side’s assumptions unchallenged. One Yes voter conceded uncertainty about copying continental Europe, but still said teenagers should not be pushed into university when “colleges or apprenticeships” could lead to employment; another reduced the economic objection to its starkest form: “We need to fix the economy before we make people go into debt”.
That puts this vote inside the live argument over whether education policy should pursue credentials or usable skills, and whether targets expand opportunity or dilute it. The chamber repeatedly returned to “hands on learning”, while its strongest voices also complained that “50% school leavers can't be brightest and most talented elite” — a debate about institutional purpose as much as student choice.
The verdict was emphatic, but the conversation was not balanced: Yes supplied the case, the alternatives and the confidence, while No supplied nothing at all.
7 Opinions
Targets don't work . Hands on learning does apprenticeships are great earn and learn
Even in China, where most people go to Uni and do real degrees, they cannot get a job. We need to fix the economy before we make people go into debt for non existent jobs.
I don't think teenagers should be pushed into university. Further education leading to employment is important, yes, but it can be obtained through colleges or apprenticeships. I'm not certain that going about it the same way Europe does is the right decision, but at least less people will be spending upwards of £4,000 on a degree that's nothing more than a line on a CV.
Universities used to push brightest and most talented a bit further to create elites. I am sorry but 50% school leavers can't be brightest and most talented elite. Effect: huge drop in quality of education and alumni, loose requirements to complete and some bogus curriculums not fitting the needs of society. For many students it is just way of extending their childhood irresponsibility (at the cost of the debt).
YES Simply because the university system has just become a money making machine with many pointless degrees. Instead of a placed of academic excellence. Baristas don't need degrees We need to bring back proper old fashioned Polytechnics and apprenticeships They taught the less academic young people proper useful life skills that benifited them by giving them skills to be sucsefull & independent. They also benefitted the country by giving it a well trained skilled workforce
Just scrap all the crappy degrees, nobody needs a degree in makeup, photography, hospitality etc. But on the other hand, we need programmes for school leavers to move onto, wider apprenticeships and support to move into work.
Absolutely! A huge proportion of university degrees now are absolutely pointless leading to no job prospects and just a way to delay being a grown up for another three years. Even the useful degrees are oversaturated to the point where people with full degrees in subjects such as Psychology are working at Starbucks! The debt is absolutely ridiculous too, and so many jobs and careers are available without having to pay a never ending debt with ridiculous interest back to unis.