I spent much of the day today at HEFCE in Centrepoint in London.  There was a meeting of the 'Teaching Quality and the Student Experience' Strategic Advisory Committee, and the turnout was complete - which meant there were around 23 of us around the table.  Rather like the conference I attended yesterday, this was a tremendous reminder of the diversity of our sector. I am one of only two representatives from the Russell Group on the committee (the other is my opposite number at Newcastle), although there is also a PVC from York bringing another perspective from a research-intensive university.  There are a number of Vice-Chancellors on the committee (including its very effective chair) but they are all from post-1992 institutions.  I think it would be an excellent sign of commitment to the student experience in universities like our own if there were to be a Russell Group VC there as well.  Other groups represented include the specialist colleges, and the further education sector.  But then we also have several HEFCE officials present, one of the permanent officers of the NUS is a valued member, and the Chief Executive of the Quality Assurance Agency is also there as an observer but one who plays a full role in discussions.   Overall, however, the committee is dominated by membership from institutions that do not have the same blend of research and teaching interests that we do.  Universities with a strong STEM interest are also limited, and only four of us (Brighton, Newcastle, Sheffield and York) have medical schools.

A statistic that would be quite easy to work out, although I have never done it, would be to show the proportion of total higher education providers against the proportions of students in the system.  I would guess that around 40% of the biggest universities teach around 70% of the total students in the system.  Among those big universities would be most of the Russell Group, and the best established of the post-1992 sector (places like Sheffield Hallam, Plymouth, Portsmouth, and Leeds and Manchester Metropolitans). In the difficult time ahead, that I alluded to yesterday, there is a danger that debate will be governed by questions of the numbers of institutions in particular categories of risk, rather than the proportions of students thus involved.

One other observation about the HEFCE interest in us all.  They are the public sector funders for us.  But they have little interest in other aspects of our funding - for example from the fees paid by international students.  HEFCE may suggest particular actions to us that will ultimately please their own paymasters in the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills, but it is not their responsibility to consider how such actions may play out with groups for whom they have no formal interest.

The landscape of funding and governance in Higher Education is becoming very much more complex year by year, and that process could speed up as institutions seek alternative sources of funding.