Whatever the outcome, some claim the debate signals a new direction for policy that could affect all public services.
They point out the tuition fee proposals expose the Government's attraction to "co-payment". It is assumed the public will not stand any more income tax rises, so improvements to public services must be paid for by contributions from those who benefit most. Co-payment charges users for services while ensuring the more advantaged pay the most.
In the tussle over tuition fees, this underlying thesis has been subjected to little scrutiny. Have the limits of taxation been reached? Is co-payment fairer than a progressive income tax? Such important questions seem to be absent from the Government's Big Conversation. Yet the answers will determine policy.
If the Government is poised to apply co-payment to the public sector, what are the implications for children's services?
The principle could mean funding for early years education is made available as a loan, repayable during adulthood, or improvements to the school curriculum are paid for by those who land good jobs.
Yet there is every sign the Government is planning to use the co-payment argument very selectively as far as children are concerned.
Tax-funded support for children is at an all-time high. A recent report by the Institute for Fiscal Studies showed public funding has increased by 50 per cent in the past five years.
As Stephen Byers demonstrated in a recent speech, advocates for collective, tax-funded provision for young children are alive and well in the Blairite camp. The Government may favour a modern childcare system that requires some contributions from better-off parents. But we currently have one that is almost totally funded by parents.
The Government seems convinced tax-funded support for children is a characteristic of a progressive society. Co-payment may turn out to be a convenient way to plug funding for services the Government believes are less of a priority.
