The Welsh Government's latest publication concerning the future of tertiary education has been met with significant frustration and disappointment from commentators and stakeholders alike. While the document outlines five critical challenges facing the sector, it has been accused of falling into a familiar pattern of detailed problem description while conspicuously avoiding the difficult decisions necessary to enact meaningful change.
A History of Strategic Ambiguity
Since the advent of devolution in 1999, Wales has been prolific in producing strategies and policy papers across various domains. However, a recurring and critical failure has been a palpable reluctance to confront the inherent trade-offs these strategies entail and to follow through with decisive action when evidence points toward uncomfortable choices. This new paper on tertiary education, unfortunately, appears to perpetuate this trend. It treats tertiary education as a unified system—a positive step—but remains excessively comfortable with ambiguity, failing to translate diagnosis into definitive prescription.
The Funding Conundrum and Institutional Sustainability
A prime example of this avoidance is the approach to funding. Evidence clearly demonstrates that returns on investment vary dramatically depending on the subject and qualification level. Despite this, public funding continues to be distributed in a relatively even manner across provisions. This is, in essence, a diplomatic way of spending scarce public resources as if all educational delivery offers identical value, which it demonstrably does not. If the Welsh Government is genuinely committed to outcomes, the response must move beyond further consultation to clear statements of priority, reduction, and protected opportunity.
Financial sustainability is addressed with some candour in the paper, particularly noting the severe impact of a 25% decline in overseas student numbers in 2024-25. This downturn has exposed a failed business model where many Welsh institutions became overly reliant on international fees, a model that papered over long-standing structural underfunding. The document notes widespread underlying deficits across universities, yet its conclusion stops short of the necessary ruthlessness. The fundamental question remains unanswered: is Wales prepared to fund the current higher education footprint honestly, or must it be deliberately restructured?
Leadership, Accountability, and the Role of Medr
Medr, the body responsible for tertiary education in Wales, sits at the centre of this complex web. While its central role is sound in principle, the paper is strangely vague about what effective leadership from Medr should entail. Wales has a habit of creating new bodies and rebranding oversight mechanisms, declaring "strategic alignment" without ever defining the clear intervention thresholds that separate genuine oversight from public relations. Without this clarity, there is a risk that Medr will be perceived as managing a gradual decline rather than spearheading urgent reform.
Critical Areas Demanding Clear Choices
The pattern of ambiguity extends into other vital areas. In research and innovation, the paper acknowledges that research is often cross-subsidised and discusses specialisation. However, it avoids the obvious implication: Wales cannot afford for every institution to attempt to be everything. Achieving stronger research performance and genuine commercialisation requires a concentrated capability, clear missions, and leadership willing to accept that not every campus can be a research powerhouse.
Vocational education, arguably the cornerstone of Wales's economic future, also receives attention. For the government to be serious about improving productivity, vocational pathways must be established as a first-class route. This requires genuine employer co-ownership, clear progression from foundational levels to higher technical qualifications, consistent quality assurance, and a funding model that actively rewards completion and learner progression.
The AI Question: Opportunity or Buzzword?
The paper's discussion of Artificial Intelligence (AI) is cited as another example of its confusing approach. The critical issue is not whether AI will impact assessment integrity—it undoubtedly will—but whether Welsh institutions will become leaders or laggards in its adoption. Will AI be leveraged to modernise educational delivery at scale, reduce bureaucratic burdens, and tangibly improve learner support? If the paper cannot articulate a clear vision here, AI risks becoming merely another fashionable heading that generates more policy documents than actual productivity gains.
A Blueprint for Credible Action
To transform this paper from a descriptive exercise into a credible plan for action, several concrete steps are necessary. First, the ensuing consultation must not simply reiterate that "difficult decisions" lie ahead. It must explicitly put specific decisions on the table for public debate. These should include rationalising duplicated course provisions, consolidating back-office functions across institutions, redesigning funding to follow measurable outcomes, and restructuring parts of the higher education footprint where long-term sustainability is no longer realistic.
Second, the government should immediately publish a transparent, five-year outcomes dashboard. This dashboard must focus on key metrics such as completion and progression rates by educational route, further and higher education outcomes, learner satisfaction, employer feedback, Welsh-medium capacity measures, and clear financial sustainability indicators. Measuring the right outcomes is essential to stop rewarding the wrong institutional behaviours.
Finally, Medr's intervention triggers must be made public and unambiguous. If an institution is persistently deficit-making, if student demand collapses in a particular area, if educational quality falls, or if governance fails, the subsequent steps must be fully transparent. This is the foundation for rebuilding public trust and preventing reactive crisis management.
An Unavoidable Election Issue
This paper represents a step forward insofar as it acknowledges the stark realities facing Welsh tertiary education. However, Wales does not need another exercise in "understanding" the sector's problems. The mess is well-documented, and its causes are known. What is needed now is the political courage to make clear, consequential choices. The upcoming election makes this imperative unavoidable.
Whoever forms the next Welsh Government will inherit a tertiary education system in a state of crisis. They must be prepared to state clearly what they will stop funding, what they will consolidate, and precisely how they will hold the entire system to account. Failure to do so will ensure that tertiary education remains perpetually stuck in the comfortable but unproductive space between ambition and delivery. The price of this continued inaction will be paid by Wales for years to come, measured in lost productivity, diminished opportunity, and eroded public confidence.
