In a little reported development, the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills recently gave ground over the ludicrous block on student loans for those with “discretionary” or “limited” leave to remain in the UK. An unjust financial hurdle has at last been removed – thanks to the determination of one student.
Beaurish Tigere decided to appeal against her student loan request being refused. Beaurish has lived in England legally for 20 years, having arrived from Zambia with her family at the age of six. A head girl at her school in York, Beaurish achieved four good
A level passes. Nonetheless she was refused a loan for a business management course solely because she was classified as an overseas student.
The rules, which were introduced by the coalition government in 2012, stated that individuals were eligible for student loans if they were “settled here without restriction on the time they can remain; be resident in England and have three years lawful residence in UK by the first day of the academic year of the course”.
Those with refugee status or humanitarian disposition may also qualify, but other UK residents without settled status were considered by the Home Office to have “limited” or “discretionary” leave to remain. The last of these is the category into which Beaurish fell, despite spending her entire school and college life in the UK. Her status lasts until 2018, at which point she can apply for indefinite leave.
On this basis the decision of the Court of Appeal sided with the government, but it was quickly challenged. The lawyers’ argument rested on this very eligibility criteria. They argued that the rules breached Beaurish’s right to an education and constituted a form of discrimination.
In July, finally, the Supreme Court decided in Beaurish’s favour. Lady Hale concluded: “Even though she does not have indefinite leave to remain, her established private life here means that she cannot be removed from the UK unless she commits a serious criminal offence and she will almost inevitably secure indefinite leave to remain in due course. She is just as closely connected and integrated into the UK society as her settled peers.”
Speaking of other students who have been similarly rejected, Lady Hale added: “These young people will also find it hard to understand why they are allowed access to all the public services, including cash welfare benefits, but are denied access to this one benefit, which is a repayable loan.”
This was an essential test case. There are hundreds of people in Beaurish’s situation and we must thank her for taking a brave stance and showing such determination when so many others feel forced to accept injustice.
Following this decision, and with additional pressure, the rules of the Student Loans Company have changed for the better. An “interim” policy to assess applicants for 2015/16 now makes it possible for student loans to be awarded to students aged under 18 who have been resident in the UK for at least seven years, and for those aged 18 to 25 who have spent more than half their life in the UK.
This means that “discretionary” or “limited” leave to remain is no longer a bar to loans.
This is a lifeline, but it is not the end of the story. The changes are temporary and are subject to a public consultation on future arrangements. It cannot be right that any student with good grades and ambition should be deterred from higher education. Not everyone can afford the exorbitant fees brought in by the coalition government. We will be playing an active part in the public consultation that, we hope, will for the long term allow students of whatever background the opportunity to fulfil their potential.
- Kevin Courtney is deputy general secretary of the National Union of Teachers. Visit www.teachers.org.uk