Part of Mr Pasqua's worry is that collapse in Algeria will see the onslaught on southern Europe's shores of a new generation of boat people, fleeing a vengeful fundamentalist regime. Anyone who believes in a peaceful transition for Algeria should recall the fate of between 30,000 and 150,000 local troops abandoned by the French to the FLN in 1962, or the contemporary verdict of a left-leaning French journalist, Jean Daniel, who found "mutual recrimination among Muslim leaders much worse than it had been between the rebels and the French". And the view in Paris, Madrid and Rome is that the implications for regional security are more alarming than any in Bosnia.Algeria is therefore a problem for Europe as much as for France. The present French foreign minister, Alain Juppe, was in London just before Christmas to urge the necessity of economic aid and political commitment to the Maghreb Arab states of North Africa. And the "Mediterranean" pillar of policy is a key item on the agenda for the French EU presidency, which begins in January. Britain has so far been cautious about any proposals to pour money southwards and there is a feeling in Whitehall that Algeriais not a principal focus of British concern.

Mr Juppe puts an eloquent case to the contrary.After the last exodus, Le Monde wrote poetically of the pieds noirs, dispossessed in Alicante, who when they strolled on the seashore invariably cast their eyes to the other side of the Mediterranean Their hate-filled leave-taking mellowed to yearning But theirs was a war of transition. Algeria is now facing the final battle for its identity, and Europe could yet shudder at the outcome.. The Labour Party is united in its support of expansion in higher education But it still has to resolve how to pay for it. The lifetime graduate tax mooted this week is one of the most controversial options being considered, but not the only one. Its very appearance on Labour's agenda is significant, though: it is the strongest signal yet that the party hierarchy accepts that a university degree should no longer be free. Twelve months ago Jeff Rooker, the party's former higher education spokesman, was sacked from the front bench after drawing up a paper supporting charges for students.

The document was thrown out by John Smith, then the Labour leader, due to misgivings in the party and concern about the impact on middle-class families.The debate on student funding was rejoined two months ago when the Social Justice Commission recommended that graduates should repay their tuition fees and living costs and the new Labour leader, Tony Blair, indicated that he was not averse to the idea. David Blunkett, the Shadow Education Secretary, and Bryan Davies, higher education spokesman, are to draw up a report in the new year on how Labour can fund a higher education system that promotes increased access but is committed to quality and standards. Privately, both Mr Blunkett and Mr Davies acknowledge they have to "grasp the nettle". But any review of policy will inevitably reopen old wounds.One sector of the party favours a hypothecated tax, with higher-income earners (whether graduates or not) paying a special levy earmarked for higher education and the health service.

The fee could be collected efficiently and easily through income tax orNational Insurance payments.Aware that such a radical reform would be a vote-loser with better-off non-graduates, others prefer a moderated and less lucrative version: the lifetime graduate tax. Opponents claim it would be little better than the existing student loan system. They say it would scare many students away from taking a degree in the first place and defeat the original objective of drawing more people from different backgrounds into higher education.The level of earnings which would trigger the tax has not been decided. But sources say Labour would set it above the £14,500 a year cut-off point used by the existing student loan system.There is, however, a significant faction in the Labour Party which believes neither a general tax nor a graduate tax would be workable. They note instead that the three alternatives set out by the Social Justice Commission all entail repaying a finite sum. One is a monthly "mortgage-style" loan repayment, although this would mean disproportionately high repayments when graduates have the least income, and smaller sums when they could afford to pay more.Another option involves a surcharge added to National Insurance, though this might mean graduates beginning repayments from earnings as low as £57 a week - the level at which National Insurance is first paid. Or it could be a rising surcharge on NationalInsurance applied only to those earning a certain level of income.This option has its supporters in the Labour Party.

They favour a system similar to that used in Australia: graduates would receive loans for maintenance and for one-fifth of their tuition costs. They would begin repaying the money once they were earninga reasonable amount.Labour politicians argue that the current loans system, under which undergraduates borrow up to £1,375 a year for a maximum of five years, favours richer students. They say that the trigger point is too low and the pay-back period too short. (All students have to pay back their loans within five years, provided they earn 85 per cent of the average wage.) Supporters of an Australian-type system believe these problems could be resolved by raising the trigger and setting longer deadlines.In the past Mr Blunkett has backed the general principle of a hypothecated tax.