Student Involvement in the Anti-Poll Tax Campaign: Looking at Redbrick

Student involvement in the anti-poll tax campaign is interesting because it straddles my analytical categories of 'Can't Pay' and 'Won't Pay'. This is because students, as we can assume most were not earning and were supporting themselves with their grants- living on baked beans etc.-, fall into the category of 'Can't Pay', however student activism conventionally follows the pattern of 'expressive politics' (see Glossary for definition), which is usually attributed to the middle class, or 'Won't Payers'. As I'm looking at whether 'Can't Payers' were at all politicised by the anti-poll tax campaign, and at whether new protest networks came about as a result of the campaign, the political nature of Birmingham's students is of great interest to me.

Being a student at the University of Birmingham it made sense to start looking here, on campus, to find out about student involvement in the campaign. I will, at a later date, explore anti-poll tax action at Birmingham City University which, until 1992, was known as Birmingham Polytechnic.

I thought the best place to start would be the student newspaper Redbrick. The Redbrick archive is housed on campus in Special Collections in the Cadbury Research Library, University of Birmingham, who own the collection. So far I've been through every issue from September 1988 to May 1991 looking for articles and letters about the poll tax. I thought that if there were any protests on campus about the poll tax then the Redbrick would have reported on it. There was no mention of protests about the poll tax on campus, however, as there were no mentions of on-campus protests against the government abolishing student grants either, which was probably a greater concern for most students, I think it is safe to infer that on-campus protests just did not really happen (or that the Redbrick didn't not report on such things, but I think that is unlikely). Therefore that there are no reports of student activty on campus, does not mean that students weren't involved, just that if they participated in the campaign then it was off-campus.

Indeed, there is evidence that students were interested in the poll tax. In Issue 1005, published on 7th December 1988, in an interview with Clare Short, the interviewer asks her if a recent Labour deafeat in Scotland was "a protest vote against Labour's rather timid Poll Tax campaign?". In Issue 1006, 18th January 1989, the poll tax is lumped together with incoming student loans and the possible destruction of the NUS as "attacks facing students". Then, come 1990 when the poll tax was introduced in England and Wales, there is an article about what students in Birmingham will pay. "Poll Tax: £80 to pay..." was published in Issue 1017 on 8th February 1990.

Issue 1017. Thanks to Redbrick for permission to use the photos. Click on photos to enlarge.

This article explains the poll tax for Birmingham was set at £406 per person and that student would have a bill of just over £80 per year. The article continues, "Students in University owned accomodation will be immediately worse off, since no rates are included in their bills at the present time". However, it explains that if students own their own house or rent but can persuade their landlords to remove the rates from their rent bills, they could be better off. But the article states that the majority of Scottish landlords did not reduce rent, and no local landlords would comment on the matter. 

Issue 1020, 22nd March 1990, expresses frustration at the Labour Party in an editorial about Neil Kinnock titled "Who's Better; Who's Best?", which mentions "recent in-party squabbles over the Poll Tax".

Furthermore, Issue 1021, 17th May 1990 mentions the poll tax a number of times. First of all, on p.4, there is an article called "Tories Feel the Pinch" about the local election results. This suggests that "the citzens of Birmingham have shown just what they think of the poll tax at the local election ballot box".

                                                        

Issue 1021

Then, on p.6, there follows an article on the "Poll Tax Protest". This reports that "well over 1,000 people attended an anti-poll tax demonstration in Chamberlain Square on May Day Bank Holiday" and that demonstrators burned their bills in protest. This article also takes up the issue of student non-payment, writing that " The Welfare Office have told the Guild that the Univeristy would take no disciplinary action against students who did not pay, as it was something outside their control. However, the senior registrar has said that action would be taken if students' non-payment was detrimental to the University's standing". Furthermore, it is mentions that the council has "no offical policy on penalties for non-payment".

Issue 1021

Although these articles suggest some interest in the poll tax, based on the assumption that Redbrick prints articles that would interest students, they don't tell us much about what students themselves thought. We can gauge the writers' politics, but not necessarily that of the wider student body. Though, that student non-payment is mentioned and in such a way that suggests one could get away with seems to suggest that non-payment was thought of as an acceptable form of protest. The letters page can shed some light however. On p.10 of the same issue, there is a letter from a first year student regarding "the vexed problem of what Christians should do in response to the poll tax".

Issue 1021: This is part of the letter. Click to enlarge.

This letter shows that at least one student had serious issues with the morality of the poll-tax. He supports non-payment, paying his poll tax bill amount to Shelter instead, and suggests that if other Christians cannot bring themselves to tear up their bill, then they should protest in some other way. This is an interesting response as it suggests that this particular student is not a 'Can't Payer', but a 'Won't Payer' of sorts.

One last direct reference to the poll tax, of what I've read so far, appears in Issue 1028, 31st January 1991. This article "Same Again!" explains that the poll tax bill will remain the same in 1991, but mentions that Council Leader Sir Richard Knowles think it is "regressive" an would like to see a return to rates based on ability to pay.

From looking at these issues of Redbrick we can see that the poll tax was an issue that affected students. However it is difficult to gauge the extent to which students participated in the anti-poll tax campaign and what their stance on non-payment was generally.

I have spoken to someone who was a foreign student in Leeds at the time of the poll tax. Dr Armin Grünbacher is a lecturer here at Birmingham now, but at the time he was on his year abroad in Leeds. He alerted me to what foriegn students thought of the tax. He explained how, from what he could tell, they were surprised to be hit by the tax, and the German students were divided over non-payment. Some who wanted to stay in England for longer than a year paid up, others who were only here for 3 terms refused to pay, and were not caught.