In the controversial Spending Review presented to Parliament on Wednesday, George Osborne revealed the details of the UK’s deepest spending cuts for decades, designed to reduce our budget deficit by £83 billion pounds before 2014⁄15.

With Britain paying £120 million a day in debt interest alone, and total debt expected to hit £900 billion in the coming years, it is clear that spending cuts are necessary. In what was described as an “irresponsible gamble” by opposition leader Ed Milliband, Osbourne unveiled a four-year plan designed to “bring Britain back from the brink”; focusing on reform, fairness and economic growth. The clear message of the review was the need for economic sustainability, achieved by eliminating waste and reducing spending on welfare by £7 billion a year.

Whilst sectors like education of the young and healthcare were protected in Wednesday’s review, it is clear that universities (despite being deemed the “jewels of the economic crown” by the Chancellor) will face tough economic times ahead. With the budget for the Department of Business, Innovation and Skills being slashed by 7.1% on Wednesday, student and teaching populations are sure to start feeling the effects of the cuts. The department, which is in charge of universities, had already been told to make £800 million worth of savings in May. In addition, the reformation of tuition fees (building on the Browne review this month) was confirmed. However, in a surprising twist, it was announced that the science ‘cash’ budget would be protected, frozen at £4.6 billion a year. The Chancellor expressed the need to increase Britain’s scientific output, and confirmed that the £324 million pounds of savings made in the sector would be saved through efficiency, and not by “cash cuts”. So, whilst the Imperial research departments may not be as badly affected as previously suspected, the teaching budget will certainly face cuts. In a time where economic sustainability is everything, perhaps more departments will follow the lead of the Department of Life Sciences in their restructure.

Whilst the Imperial research departments may not be as badly affected as previously suspected, the teaching budget will certainly face cuts

Government funding from higher education is to be cut by £2.9 billion (40%) from £7.1 billion to £4.2 billion, by 2014-2015. This will shift a greater proportion of the funding for university teaching from the tax payer to the student.

Therefore, the major effect on students is going to be the soaring of tuition fees and the subsequent debt to repay. The spending review accepts Lord Browne’s report and states that universities will be able to increase graduate contributions from the 2012-2013 academic year. Luckily for many of us, we will have graduated by then. But the BMA have already warned ministers that if tuition fees are levied at around £10,000, future medical students could face debts of around £70,000 on leaving university – a crippling financial burden.

In future, the choice of university may be based on financial rather than academic reasoning with students detracted from elite universities by their higher costs. To reduce social prejudice, a £150 million National Scholarship fund introduced by 2014-2015 will support students from low income backgrounds as well as low income graduates. There will be loan support from the government for full and, for the first time, part time students.

In an unexpected move, Wednesday’s Spending Review spared science and research from the brunt of the most hurtful cuts such as those affecting welfare. Even days before this, statements were being made behind the scenes regarding the high possibility of a freeze in the science budget. These claims ultimately came to fruition during George Osborne’s formal announcement, in which he detailed that the science budget would indeed be protected at £4.6 billion per year.

“Britain is a world leader in scientific research and that is vital to our future economic success,” he said.

The freeze in the budget, when adjusted for inflation, means that there will still be a cut in the budget, but at just under 10% it is well below earlier estimates such as 25%. The success has been attributed to Business Secretary Vince Cable and Science Minister David Willetts and their negotiation with the Treasury earlier in the week, but other significant events that may have influenced the final decision include significant protest from the Science is Vital group, with their petition of over 36000 signatories and rally at Westminster earlier in the month. The Times also published a special plea on Monday to limit cuts to below 10%.

The latest announcements have been met with tentative positivity across the scientific spectrum.

The Royal Society, a fellowship of eminent and prominent scientists, previously stated that a cut of 10% would “seriously jeopardise” the UKs scientific capabilities. Martin Rees, President of the Royal Society is however pleased with the “welcome news” and praises the outcome, stating to the BBC that the, “government has recognised the importance of sustaining the international standing of UK science in a context where other nations are forging ahead.”

Campaign for Science and Engineering (CaSE), a pressure group devoted to aiding scientific growth in the UK, has highlighted some possible future problems for the sector in response to the cuts. It suggests that the number of research staff entering science and engineering will decrease, with the potential of postgraduate positions falling by a tenth. Though Director of CaSE, Imran Khan, is encouraged that the cuts are not deeper, he also believes the UKs standing in terms of scientific output will be threatened.

Universities UK (UUK), representative organisation for the country’s higher education institutions, echoes the sentiments of the other groups. Professor Steve Smith, President of UUK says, “We are pleased that the Government has listened to Universities UK’s views on the importance of science and research to the growth of the economy…however the freezing of funding for research will still pose challenges to our universities.” Professor Smith goes on to list two priorities for the sector that he believes are crucial to future success: firstly, ensuring that “the cuts do not impact negatively on current and future students” and secondly “to find alternative funding sources to replace these lost funds.”

The budget is set to be distributed among the UKs research councils, who will provide grants to both individuals and universities based on their academic strength. Because of this, it is thought that some of the country’s elite universities will take a greater proportion of the money, threatening universities less focused on research.

However, the news of no deeper cuts will likely appease those scientists who were troubled by the initial projected figures, after it was recently reported that some individuals are considering a move to better funded courses and research positions overseas. Time will no doubt tell how satisfied scientists become as the cuts become fully implemented across the country.

So what will the impact be on Imperial? The 2010 NSS (National Student Survey) results point towards already excellent teaching at Imperial with an outstanding result of 90% for satisfaction with learning resources. With a poorer result obtained in satisfaction with assessment and feedback, the Rector has made these issues an immediate priority in the university. Implemented this year, the Biology department now has a two week deadline for coursework feedback. This is just one example of many highlighting Imperial’s commitment to continuous improvement in teaching.

Additionally, the Browne review stated that any universities charging over £7000 a year will be ‘subject to scrutiny, ensuring that these extra funds are being used fairly’. Despite the tuition fee cap being lifted, the government emphasises that regulations are still firmly in place. We should rest assured that Imperial is being kept a close eye on.

With the government’s pledge to maintain funding for ‘STEM’ subjects – science, technology, engineering and mathematics, Imperial’s teaching budget may not be so harshly wiped. The surprising freeze on science research funding and likely high allocation of resources to research-intensive universities should also sit nicely with Imperial.

So future Imperial students can expect to see fees doubled, tripled, maybe quadrupled, but it seems that the teaching and research are set to stay much the same high quality as ever.