SHIREEN IJOYAH HAS RAISED her three children in relative poverty on one of the most deprived estates of Peckham, southeast London, and has always taught them that education will be their ticket to a better lifestyle. But now, as the Government deliberates over its plans for university funding, the family feels that their futures are on hold.

A single mother, Ijoyah has managed to steer Kim, 17, Michelle, 15 and Jonathan, 12, away from the crime and drugs that have engulfed so many youngsters in her neighbourhood. She has provided a home in which education and learning are valued above all else. Her efforts have resulted in her children achieving top grades in their school exams and she has no doubt that each one has the potential to obtain a good degree.

Yet despite being the sort of family the Government says it wants to attract into higher education, the probable introduction of top-up fees, or a graduate tax is threatening to become a huge obstacle to their dreams of attending university.

It is likely that Ijoyah, who earns £200 a month after tax, would qualify for an exemption from any increase in tuition fees. But the Government seems to be moving in the direction of favouring a system of student loans or graduate taxation, which would increase dramatically the £10,000 debt with which the average student leaves university.

“For children who have grown up knowing financial hardship, the prospect of getting into major debt before they even start their working life is going to act as a major turn-off,” she says. “Wealthier families would be able to fund their children and allow them to start their adult lives with a clean slate, but I simply wouldn’t be able to do this. When Tony Blair was elected, his slogan was ‘education, education, education’. Yet he seems to be making it as difficult as possible for families like us to get one.”

Even for a family with a higher income, the issue is worrying. James and Susan Fallon’s daughter Joanne, 20, is in her third year of a human geography degree at Queen Mary, University of London, and expects to leave with more than £14,000 of debt. This is despite the fact that she has held down a part-time job and her parents have given her only a small monthly allowance throughout her degree course. They now fear for the level of graduate debt that will be incurred by her 15-year-old brother, James.

James Fallon, a rental manager for a construction company in Cheshire, says: “We haven’t had enough notice to plan long-term for any significant top-up fees and it’s awful to watch your children having to start their adult lives with so much debt.

“Like most parents, we’ll do our utmost to find the money from somewhere, if we have to; but it will involve making considerable sacrifices. My wife has already taken a part-time job to help Joanne get through through university, and I’m in the higher tax bracket, so I feel that I’m going to be charged twice, which does not seem right.”

The unpopularity of any attempt to charge more for a university education was evidenced by the 23,000-strong protest march organised by the National Union of Students in London last month. Both students and parents took part.

Yet the reality is that universities are desperately underfunded and the existing £1,100-a-year flat fee for tuition does not begin to solve the problem. The shortfall in capital investment is so acute that at least £5.3 billion is needed merely to raise facilities to a satisfactory standard. If the Government continues to pursue its goal of steering 50 per cent of 18 to 30-year-olds into higher education, the problem can only get worse.

For Nicholas Paul, a barrister, and his wife Beth Prince, a family solicitor, the principle of charging people in the higher-income brackets for their children’s university education is not objectionable. After all, as the Government has been at pains to point out, the average graduate earns £400,000 more in a lifetime than a non-graduate.

Their daughter Clara, 17, will be taking up a place at Liverpool University after a gap year, and her 14-year-old sister, Anya, also plans to go to university. Prince, from Clapham, South London, says: “Higher education is not like the health service; not everyone gets the benefit of it, so not everyone should have to pay for it. It will involve some sacrifice for us, but that is what parents are here to do.”

Though Paul also has no qualms about charging those who can afford it, his concern is that the proposals will prompt a return to the time when university was the exclusive preserve of the privileged.

“It’s not wrong in principle that students or their parents should pay,” he says. “Funding has to come from somewhere. But I’m afraid that it will be an excuse for elitism. The best universities will charge the most money and therefore only the wealthier students will be able to go to them.

“In a sense, universities are already ranked in a hierarchy, but this will make it worse. Higher education should be about excellence and equality. My great fear is that the funding issue will cause people to lose sight of this.”

Explore Education

• Schools

• GCSE and A Level

• Good University Guide

• Sunday Times University Guide

• Student

• Young Times

• School Gate

Times recommends

• University black hole as applicants surge
• Students to be offered 'no-fee degrees'
• 'White flight' causing school segregation