It's a good thing when politicians recognize that there are people out there who are less fortunate than the political class. But this empathy only does anyone any good if policymakers refrain from socialistic government schemes that make poverty worse.
Ironically, the economic collapse in Europe has united both the poor and rich members of the EU in agreement that the EU has none of their best interests at heart. The political winds have shifted and are blowing against the EU.
"Saving lives versus saving money" comparisons confuse ends with means. The end of saving the economy is not to have more money. The end is to have resources necessary to preserve the lives and health of countless human beings.
Entrepreneurs can offer new ways of serving established markets, but large institutions will keep with what has worked in the past so long as it just continues to work in the present. Radical change happens only in an emergency. For the British university that time has now arrived.
Egalitarians think that equality has intrinsic value: they advocate it for its own sake, not just to forestall bad consequences. But why is a situation in which some in it have been made better off, and none worse off, worse than one of equality?