Don't overlook the anger of the students that everyone knew there was going to be a lockdown but they insisted all the students return so they could pay rent. You can't make this stuff up. The students have every right to be very angry, they've been ripped off for money and are stuck in a very uncomfortable place to do lockdown. Everyone knew it would happen, staying home and refusing to return was "discouraged" by way of pure retribution. You don't come back, you forfeit your place and everything you've worked for.

People aren't scared enough of students because apparently naked fear is the only motivator to get these awful politicians to behave with even the smallest shred of decency. Lock them in, claim they were told it would happen then acknowledge that this claim was a total lie. No consequences. All the expense, all hassle and frustration on the students. Milk them harder, that's what they're for say the powers that be.

> so they could pay rent.

this may be true, but your implication is unnecessarily sinister. these organizations have balances sheets and budgets too. like everyone else in the whole world, their business model probably isnt equipped to handle an epidemic. something has to give. maybe it shouldn't have been this, but the premise that colleges dont need money to survive is foolish.

1. in other places, the money that colleges need to survive (especially when they don't actually have to operate fully) does not come out of students' pockets. That's a choice that the UK (and US...) political process has arrived at.

2. You're making it sound like "but my business model depends on it" is somehow a valid excuse to put people into physical danger and through pretty much guaranteed psychological stress.

"My business model requires me to lock the fire exits" is something that people have been (rightly) jailed for.

Universities should never have been fully privatized in the first place.

Something does have to give. Why you think it should be the students is a total mystery to me though.

The university is irresponsibly forcing the students to come on campus to study (a health risk) so they have to pay rent and is desperately trying to restrict their movement/freedoms to decrease the likelihood/speed at which the government shuts the whole thing down and sends everyone home.

The students certainly aren't getting what they paid for. Far from it. There's been a material change in the "product" they are getting and they should be released from the contract from it on those grounds.

If the university can't survive without the rental income and the government wants to save it, then they can do that, but it's not the students responsibility to willingly be defrauded to ensure the financial stability of an institution they have no stake in.

Holy shit the mental gymnastics with this.

> It's okay for a business to knowingly fuck people over because they need money.

A place in the university course, or a place in halls-of-residence, though?

Also if they block through-ways they would only force more people to go through main entrances increasing the likelihood of close contact there.

They also appear to have chosen to use riot fencing that is designed to coercively maximize the difficulty of traversal. They could have chosen fencing for which traversal would require intent, but ultimately allow it.

That's pretty standard construction site fencing which is used in a lot of countries.

The fence would probably also be pretty ineffective as "riot fencing" since it is really high and has a small foot. Meaning it is unstable and easy to push over. Even when the fences are chained that will still be a problem.