Can I ask what make you say this? My information is that:

UK fees apply if:

you are resident within the UK prior to the start date of your course and will remain in the UK for the duration of the course, or you have a BFPO address;

and

* either you’ve been living in the UK, the European Economic Area (EEA) or Switzerland, or an Overseas Agreed Territory for at least three years before starting your course

* or you are not from the areas above but have “permanent” or “indefinite” leave to remain in the UK and been resident in the UK for at least three years and will remain resident in the UK for the length of your course (i.e. not on a temporary or renewable visa);

* or you are a UK income tax payer who is temporarily and unavoidably outside the UK (for no more than three years) and you remain liable for UK income tax whilst resident outside the UK; or you are a dependant of such a person.

http://www3.open.ac.uk/contact/faq.aspx?t=S&cat=1-1GSR1Z

By my reading a Polish plumber who emigrated to the UK and 2 years later applied to enrol in a UK university or higher-education course would be resident within the UK prior to the start date of the course and have been living in the European Economic Area (EEA) for at least three years before starting the course, so would pay UK fees.

“The OU is subsidised per se, so all EU students are subsidised. However, one component of HE funding attachs specifically to students and only goes to those resident in the UK.”

Unfortunately the OU’s subsidy is under threat. Under current government proposals, those students who already have a qualification at the same or lower level to one they already hold, won’t be subsidised by the UK government. So someone (a UK resident) in Ingrid’s position of having a PhD and then doing an MA have to pay the unsubsidised fee. If the policy goes through unchanged – there is still scope for modification – this will hit the OU very hard.

The OU (along with other affected institutions) has started a campaign against this policy. Details at http://www.backtheou.com. (I work at the OU so I’m not entirely disinterested in this matter!)

“So a student from another EU country resident in the UK would pay the same fees as a UK student.”

This is only true if the EU student had been already resident in the UK for 3 years before starting the course AND such residence was not for the purposes of education.

In other words, a Polish plumber who emigrated to the UK and 2 years later applied to enrol in a UK university or higher-education course would pay the (much-higher) foreign fee, not the (lower) UK fee.

On the other hand, a working academic may well add far more in terms of skills to their fellow students’ experience of the course.

When I did my engineering degree there were several people there who had done their New Zealand Certificate in Engineering (the technicians’ course) and we learnt to grab them for labs and study groups due to their practical knowledge.

Well, firstly you would have to provide us with some hard data on exactly how many foreign students never pay back their subsidies and what that amounts to financially. While I’m sure that there are such cases I highly doubt that this is the norm and without such data your generalization amounts to a slur.

Then some countries provide students who study abroad and couldn’t otherwise afford it with financial assistance for both living expenses and tuition fees. Whether it’s paid by the government or the parents this money that goes directly into the UK economy and via taxation the budget. Also a lot of EU countries don’t have such high tuition fees and for UK students can study, for instance, in Germany basically for free.

The UK not actually manufacturing and exporting all that much is highly dependent on the influx of foreign money and foreign students are just part of that equation, which highly benefits the UK. Many of those decide to stay, start or are employed by UK companies and thus further benefit the UK economy.

Finally, the common market is indeed designed to level the differences between the EU member states and to give every EU citizen a fair shot at succeeding. The rich countries have been subsidizing countries like Ireland or Spain for decades without a lot of complaining and these now have taken off economically. Taking the long view this was to the benefit of everybody involved.

This is the reason. I am right that thanks to the common market EU citizens are all treated the same. So why the difference in fees? The difference is based upon residence (which is a bit odd for a distance learning course). The OU is subsidised per se, so all EU students are subsidised. However, one component of HE funding attachs specifically to students and only goes to those resident in the UK. The difference in fees is to make up this difference, and also to pay for things like extra postage and administration costs. This is in distinction to extra-EU students who are run at a profit and used to subsidise those inside the EU.

‘leederick, both EU and overseas students provide a substantial financial net benefit to the UK’

So what? What’s important is not whether they provide a financial net benefit, but whether a greater financial net benefit could provided by using the funding for other purposes (such as supporting students who are liable to pay their debts).

As for the course fees – non-UK European Students pay much more than UK students (the difference is something like 1200 vs 2000 UK Pounds), so I take it the non-UK European students are not subsidized. But perhaps someone who is genuinly informed rather than just making guesses can illuminate us.