Ironically, this grade inflation has the effect of further boosting the Russell Group universities, particularly at the expense of the non-Russell pre-1992 universities. Previously, a student might be advised to go to a non-Russell university because the course matched the student’s interests and abilities, the geographical location fitted the student’s preferences, smaller size and campus environments enabled easier socialising with students outside one’s own department and a good student would get additional attention that they might not get at the very top universities. The student would be able to signal by the classification of degree – a first or a strong upper second – that they had put in the effort, English universities are private charities that receive substantial public funding. For most institutions, this makes up the bulk of their income. Public funding comes through a buffer, given the acknowledged need to protect the independence of the individual university. This is partly a matter of efficiency – it is unhelpful to have the government of the day unduly micro-manage a university. It is also, however, a recognition of the special importance of protecting academic freedom and free speech, for both staff and students. It is ironic that the government has simultaneously issued the Prevent Duty on universities and has raised concerns about limitations to free speech on campus.

Nonetheless, the taxpayer has a right – through the government of the day – to have university expenditure reflect the taxpayers’ priorities. Sometimes, the majority of academics will be supportive, as with the ‘public sector equality duty’ applicable to UK universities and the corresponding ‘affirmative action’ programmes in the US. In other cases, the priorities may not be the ones that would be chosen by the university. The taxpayer has a right, for example, to emphasise STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics) degrees, or instead to wish to encourage Arts degrees.

The funding authorities, independently or following government directives, set up the framework for accessing state support. The 2011 policy switched most subsidy from a block teaching grant, plus fees at £3000, to student fees of £9000 financed through the contingent loan system and limited grant to support some subject areas. Since the previous block teaching grant averaged out in the vicinity of £3000 per student, this is a substantial increase in funding. It is also a significant shift in how funding flows from the taxpayer to the university.