Labourers is forcing a vote in the House of Commons in a bid to prevent an increase in tuition wages in England.
Fees are due to rise to £9,250 this year and then again to various than £9,500 for next year.
Labour is tabling a motion for Wednesday that hand down reverse the tuition fee increase — with the claim that the outcome purpose be binding.
But the Department for Education says that even if the government obsolete the vote «this motion has no legal effect».
Labour is attempting to use orderly process to block the tuition fee increases which are due to be implemented for students from this autumn.
The shadow education secretary, Angela Rayner, is seeking to invalidate the «statutory instrument» process that will raise fees.
She alleged that fee increases would push up costs for students and warned that MPs who service raising fees «will have to answer to the people they stand in for».
«They won’t even trust their own MPs to back their latest hike in scholar fees, so they’re trying to stop us voting on it at all,» said Ms Rayner.
The Theatre of Commons authorities say that there is a 40-day limit to force a opinion on this and this has been exceeded.
But Labour says that it has not been brooked any opportunity until now in the parliamentary timetable to put forward its opposition and as such the consequence would remain binding.
Labour is threatening to mount a legal impugn if the government loses on the fee increase vote and then disregards the outcome.
A Drudgery spokesman suggested that a legal challenge would argue that wait ons were acting beyond their powers if they were to steam ahead with a fee increase after a parliamentary defeat.
«It would be impossible for the House of Commons to pass such a clear resolution and for the government not to instantly act on the clear will of the House.
«Any attempt to charge fees in those circumstances is obligated to end up in the courts,» he said.
But the House of Commons’ authorities have rejected the maintain that Labour’s motion could be binding — and said it would be up to deans to decide how to respond to the outcome of the vote.
«A resolution of this nature take up by the House would have no statutory effect and would not have any consequence in law for the laws,» said a House of Commons spokesman.
A Department for Education spokesman demanded: «This motion has no legal effect. Our student finance system safeguards that graduates only start paying back their allowances when they are earning over £21,000 and debts are written off after 30 years.
«This come close to ensures that costs are split fairly between graduates and the taxpayer, and does this while help more young people from disadvantaged backgrounds go to university than at all times before, up 43% since 2009.»