Ms Reps said the free-of-charge system will face change anyway as neither universities nor students are totally satisfied. «One effect was that the universities are forced to open more English language based specialties (for these, they can ask for fee – edit),» noted Ms Reps.
She cited the example of Holland where part of the universities have gradually switched over to English, but have therewith acquired a competitive edge next to the UK. «The issue is: do we want the nations of the world to study here and we’d be proud of that, or perhaps we are not ready for it,» reasoned Ms Reps. «Based on that, cool stuff could be built... but if that means all we have left in Estonian is ethno and eco – do we want that?»
According to Ms Lauristin, many foresaw the problems-to-be with free-of-charge higher education – proven prophetic. «It ought to have been discussed more thoroughly back then,» admitted Ms Lauristin.
She went on to say the Okk Report was Finland-leaning, and written on basis of opinions of a technocratic-administrative group. «Mr Okk has familiarised himself with administrative experience, the report involves a list of leading administrators at Finnish universities, as well as Estonian rectors,» said Ms Lauristin and added: «This is the view of a narrow interest group, not characteristic to 21st century. Mr Okk’s report represents the view taking us back to the centralised machine-like management scheme of 20th century. In 21st century, approaches are rather different towards activities of organisations, research and education.»
Meanwhile Mr Lauristin recognised Mr Okk for assuming personal responsibility with a document whereby he calls the society to debate. «Therefore, it is very important for all to realise this [report] is not and indeed cannot be the basis for any decisions,» said Ms Lauristin.
Mr Aaviksoo agrees debate is needed but cautions against the attitude that there is some evil intent lurking behind the report. «We must debate. We must benevolently debate,» was the rector’s wording.