Andy Burnham is said to have his ‘priorities all wrong’ (Image: Getty)
Andy Burnham has been accused of putting foreign students ahead of Brits as Tories launched a furious attack on plans to cut fees for EU citizens at UK universities. The Prime Minister’s plan to cosy up to the EU, designed to pave the way for a new trade deal, is expected to cost £450million in lost tuition fee income.
But it comes as the Labour Government pushes up student fee repayments by £400million for UK graduates. Conservative Shadow Education Secretary Laura Trott said: “Politics is about priorities, and English students are bottom of the list for Andy Burnham.
“All Labour have done since getting into power is make the student loan system worse by freezing thresholds. The PM could have fixed this at the Budget but instead he wants to give almost the same amount of money to the EU, to cut university fees for EU students.
“His priorities are all wrong.”
Mr Burnham is considering cutting fees for EU students from £38,000 to as low as £9,535, so that they pay the same as UK undergraduates.
It would be part of a deal to be agreed at a summit on November 20, which would significantly cut red tape on UK food exports to EU nations.
The cost is estimated at £450million annually. But at the same time, Labour has increased repayments for many English and Welsh graduates by freezing repayment thresholds for student loan schemes.
Watchdog the Office for Budget Responsibility says the move, which affects people on “plan 2” payment schemes, will raise an extra £400million every year.
Get the latest politics news straight to your phone Join us on WhatsApp
Our community members are treated to special offers, promotions, and adverts from us and our partners. You can check out at any time. Read our Privacy Policy
The UK-EU deal is also expected to mean the UK stops sending foreign national prisoners to the EU, and to include a “Youth Experience” scheme allowing freedom of movement for younger people.
It was condemned as “a re-subjugation to European lawmakers” by veteran Tory MP Sir Bill Cash. He told GB News: “It really crosses the boundaries of sovereignty, and this is in fact a racket.”
Mr Burnham argues his trade deal could add 0.4% to the UK economy. In an interview this week, he said: “I have the opportunity to add to UK growth … I think people in Britain would expect me to take that with both hands.
“If that can get growth, if that can help our farmers, if that can remove red tape from British businesses, I think most people would expect me to go to that summit and negotiate the best deal that I can.”
Andy Burnham to Slash EU Students’ Fees While Making Brits Pay More – ‘All Wrong!’
A major political row has erupted in Britain after Prime Minister Andy Burnham came under fire over plans to reduce university tuition fees for European Union students while British graduates face higher student loan repayments.
The proposal has sparked anger among Conservative politicians, who accuse Labour of putting the interests of European students ahead of young British people. Critics argue that the government is prepared to spend hundreds of millions of pounds helping EU nationals access cheaper university education while simultaneously increasing the financial burden on British graduates.
The controversy comes ahead of a major UK-EU summit scheduled for 20 November 2026, where Burnham hopes to secure a closer economic relationship with Brussels. Although the government believes the proposed arrangement could deliver significant benefits for British businesses, the financial implications have raised serious questions about its priorities.
1. EU Students Could See Their University Fees Dramatically Reduced
Under the proposal being considered by Burnham’s government, students from European Union countries could pay the same domestic tuition fees as British undergraduates.
Currently, most new EU students without qualifying pre-Brexit residence rights are classified as international students and must pay significantly higher fees.
International tuition fees can reach approximately £38,000 per year, depending on the university and course. By comparison, the standard annual tuition fee for eligible domestic students in England is £9,790.
The proposed change could therefore provide substantial savings for European students wishing to study at British universities.
The government is reportedly considering compensating universities for the income they would lose by reducing fees for EU nationals.
However, this arrangement could cost British taxpayers as much as £450 million annually under the most expensive scenario.
The figure has attracted considerable attention because universities are already experiencing financial difficulties, with some institutions struggling to balance their budgets amid rising operational costs and declining international student income.
For Burnham, the proposal represents part of a wider effort to rebuild Britain’s relationship with Europe and secure economic advantages from closer cooperation.
2. Conservatives Accuse Labour of Putting British Students Last
The proposal has prompted a furious response from Conservative politicians.
Shadow Education Secretary Laura Trott accused Burnham of getting his priorities completely wrong.
She argued that British graduates were already facing increased financial pressure because of changes to student loan repayment arrangements.
Trott criticised Labour for freezing student loan repayment thresholds, arguing that the policy would result in many graduates paying more over time.
She questioned why the government appeared willing to spend almost the same amount of money supporting cheaper tuition fees for European students while failing to provide equivalent relief for British graduates.
Her criticism centred on a fundamental question: why should taxpayers finance lower university fees for European students when British graduates are facing higher repayment obligations?
The Conservatives argue that the government should prioritise domestic students and address the financial difficulties facing young people before offering additional concessions to Brussels.
The phrase “All wrong!” has become a powerful expression of the opposition’s criticism of Burnham’s education priorities.
3. British Graduates Face Higher Student Loan Repayments
Another major source of controversy concerns the government’s decision to freeze student loan repayment thresholds.
Under the current system, graduates repay their student loans when their earnings exceed a specified income threshold.
Freezing these thresholds means that as salaries increase over time, more graduates may become liable for repayments or pay more than they otherwise would.
The Office for Budget Responsibility estimates that the policy could generate approximately £400 million in additional annual repayments.
This has created an uncomfortable political contrast for Labour.
On one side, the government is considering spending up to £450 million annually to compensate universities for cheaper tuition fees for EU students.
On the other, British graduates could collectively face approximately £400 million in additional annual repayments because of frozen thresholds.
Although these are different financial arrangements and the money does not necessarily come from the same budget, the comparison has provided the Conservatives with an opportunity to attack Labour’s priorities.
Many graduates already face considerable financial commitments, including mortgages, rent, childcare and everyday living expenses.
Consequently, any increase in student loan repayments is likely to be unpopular among younger workers and middle-income households.
4. What Does Brussels Want in Return?
The proposed reduction in university fees is not simply an education policy. It forms part of a wider negotiation between Britain and the European Union.
Burnham wants British companies to gain access to the EU’s proposed Made in Europe industrial programme.
The programme is designed to strengthen European manufacturing and protect strategic industries against international competition.
Without an agreement, British manufacturers could face disadvantages when competing for certain European public contracts and industrial subsidies.
The government believes that securing access would benefit British businesses, particularly in manufacturing, automotive production, steel and defence industries.
In exchange, Brussels wants European students to receive more favourable tuition fee arrangements at British universities.
The British government is reportedly prepared to consider the financial concession, provided that British businesses receive meaningful benefits in return.
This makes the proposal a significant economic and political bargaining issue rather than simply a decision about university admissions.
5. The £450 Million Question: Is the Deal Worth It?
The central question is whether reducing tuition fees for EU students represents a sensible investment in Britain’s economic future.
Supporters argue that closer cooperation with Europe could create significant opportunities for British companies.
The government believes that reducing trade barriers, improving access to European markets and strengthening industrial cooperation could increase economic growth.
It also argues that attracting talented European students could benefit British universities, research institutions and the wider economy.
However, critics question whether the government has negotiated sufficient guarantees to justify the financial commitment.
The Russell Group has warned that allowing EU students to pay domestic tuition rates could cost universities more than £500 million annually.
There are also concerns that universities could become increasingly dependent on government compensation if international fee income falls.
The government must therefore demonstrate that the economic benefits of the agreement are greater than the financial costs.
6. Brexit Supporters See Another Major Concession to Brussels
The proposal has also reopened the wider political debate about Brexit.
For supporters of leaving the European Union, one of the main objectives was to regain control over national policies and public spending.
They argue that Burnham’s willingness to offer cheaper university education to European students demonstrates how far Labour is prepared to go to improve relations with Brussels.
Some Conservative politicians have warned that the agreement could represent another step towards deeper European integration.
Reform UK leader Nigel Farage is also likely to use the controversy to challenge Labour’s approach to Brexit, immigration and national sovereignty.
However, Burnham maintains that closer economic cooperation does not necessarily mean reversing Brexit.
His government argues that practical agreements can benefit British businesses and create opportunities without restoring full EU membership.
The challenge will be convincing voters that the financial concessions are justified and that Britain is receiving sufficient benefits in return.
Conclusion
Andy Burnham’s proposal to reduce university tuition fees for European students has triggered a major political controversy in Britain.
While EU students could potentially see their annual fees fall from tens of thousands of pounds to approximately £9,790, British graduates are facing increased repayment pressures following the freezing of student loan thresholds.
The potential £450 million annual cost has given Conservative politicians an opportunity to accuse Labour of placing European interests ahead of British students.
Nevertheless, the government argues that the proposed arrangement could help secure valuable economic benefits, particularly through access to the EU’s Made in Europe industrial programme.
In my opinion, the government must provide a clear explanation of how this agreement will benefit ordinary British taxpayers and young people. Supporting international education and strengthening economic relations with Europe can be worthwhile objectives, but British graduates should not feel that their financial difficulties are being ignored.
Ultimately, the success of Burnham’s proposal will depend on whether the economic advantages outweigh the costs. British students, universities and taxpayers deserve a fair deal, and the government must demonstrate that its European ambitions will deliver tangible benefits for the United Kingdom.