Controversial plans to increase student tuition fees have been unveiled in the Queen's Speech.

Despite opposition from MPs of all political parties, the Higher Education Bill will aim to allow universities to charge fees of up to £3,000 per year for their courses from 2006.

Phil Willis, education spokesman, said: "Labour makes access to higher education dependent on the ability to pay, not on the ability to learn.

"This Bill will widen the social divide and makes it less likely that students from poorer backgrounds will access Britain's top universities.

"The government seeks to burden students with mortgage style debts of up to £33,000, which many students will still be paying back when they retire. It transfers the cost from the state to the student moving us nearer to the USA model but without the corporate or alumni giving that is the norm in America.

"This Bill fails to meet the financial needs of our universities and does little to reverse two decades of underfunding by successive governments."

Forum Response: Professional Association of Teachers

A PAT spokesperson told ePolitix.com: "Although deferring payment until after graduation is better than paying up-front, we remain very concerned about high levels of student debt.

"Allowing universities to charge even higher tuition fees is bound to deter many - especially those from families on lower incomes. We do not want to see a two-tier system of higher education, with only the rich able to afford to go to university or to those universities charging higher fees.

"The return of maintenance grant is welcome, but they will be only for the very poorest students. PAT would like to see a national maintenance allowance for all students in full-time tertiary education or training. This would be an investment in our young people and in the future of our country.

"As a teachers' union, PAT has long been concerned about the ability of young teachers to pay off student debts and we are worried that this is deterring many from becoming teachers.

"Most graduates faced with student debts, high house prices - and now deferred tuition fee payments as well - are likely to seek careers paying the highest salaries - which does not include teaching.

"When tuition fees were first introduced, we warned that they would deter students by burdening them with debt and making the start of their professional life very difficult. Sadly, it seems that we have been proved right.

"We hear of newly qualified teachers leaving teaching because they could not repay their loans and pay for accommodation on a teacher's salary - at a time when there is a recruitment crisis in the classroom.

"It seems that the prospect of debt is deterring many applicants from going to university, and this means that society loses out too.

"With student fees, large mortgages, dwindling pension returns and high living and transport costs, I am concerned that many young people will be swamped by what is becoming an in-debt society."

Forum Response: National Union of Teachers

Doug McAvoy, general secretary of the National Union of Teachers, said: "The government has failed to appreciate the depth of opposition to its plans for top up fees and the reasons for it. Even with its planned bursaries and grants for the poorest students, they will still be left with huge debts at the end of their university careers.

"The fear of debt itself will discourage young people from less well off families and will deter entirely those from the poorest.

"The government shows no appreciation of the loathing less well off members of society have for debt. The better off may flourish on credit cards and loans but the poor are terrified of debt.

"They have seen the havoc caused to families by debt and they do not want to start their working lives with this millstone round their necks.

"If the government is serious about promoting the education of all our young people, it should withdraw this damaging scheme and think again."

Forum Response: UCET

A spokesperson for UCET told ePolitix.com: "UCET notes the government's decision to go ahead with the increase in students' tuition fees. Institutions desperately need increased funding, but we would be concerned if this increase meant any loss of teacher education and training students.

"It is essential that these students come from across the whole of Society. Currently PGCE students have their tuition fee waived. We hope this will continue - and will be extended to the final year students on the undergraduate route - and that it will be the whole of the increased fee that is waived, not just a portion of it."

Forum Response: GMB

Kevin Curran, general secretary of the GMB, said: "While we welcome many of the small but significant changes the government is planning, the only really radical agenda they are pushing forward is Top-Up Fees for which they have no one's support."

Forum Response: Royal College of Nursing

Dr Beverley Malone, general secretary of the RCN, said: "The RCN welcomes the proposed abolition of up-front tuition fees for full time students but is concerned about any measures to charge top up fees to nursing students.

"The UK is already dealing with severe nursing shortages. Fees will only increase students' financial hardship and poverty, leading to wider recruitment and retention problems for nurses."

Forum Response: Association of Teachers and Lecturers

Dr Mary Bousted, general secretary of ATL, said: "We are extremely disappointed to see that in spite of the construction of a well-researched and cogent case against the imposition of top-up fees, the government is still aiming to implement this divisive policy.

"We are now relying on the good sense of the House of Commons to prevent this mistake from becoming law and we hope that good sense will prevail.

"Top-up fees will deter students from poorer backgrounds going to university, restrict higher education to those who can pay and destroy the government's claims to support widening access to higher education."

Forum Response: SCOP

A spokesperson for SCOP said: "We welcome the move to abolish up-front payment of tuition fees. We want to see the new Graduate Repayment Scheme coupled with decent bursaries and maintenance grants for students from poorer and disadvantaged backgrounds.

"SCOP would also like to see progressive waiving of debt for all graduates entering key public sector professions (teaching, social care, health etc)."

Forum Response: Universities UK

A spokesperson said: "Universities UK welcomes the commitment in the Queen's Speech to place universities on a sound financial footing. The UK's universities urgently need additional income to address the severe financial difficulties they face and to avert a quality crisis.

"Universities UK supports the option currently on the table - the proposed introduction of a graduate contribution of up to £3000 per annum - as this will make a vital contribution to reducing this funding gap.

"Universities UK also believes the removal of the upfront fee is a very positive step, making higher education free at the point of use. We believeit is fair to expect graduates, and other beneficiaries of higher education, to make some contribution towards the cost.

"However we are of course aware of the concerns about the potential impact of higher fees and will take steps wherever possible to avoid poor students being deterred from higher education, just as universities have already made very considerable efforts to widen participation.

"We now await the detail of the Higher Education Bill and will comment in more detail at that stage."