WHO will join me in paying a “windfall tax” to save future students from the misery of mountainous debt that will take until their middle age to repay?

This week, a former chief executive of BP, Lord Browne, was picked to lead a review to examine when – sorry, I mean whether – to lift the current £3,225-a-year cap on tuition fees.

In truth, the only issues are when the cap will be hiked and by how much, as Labour and the Conservatives quietly agree that fees must soar to rescue universities pleading poverty.

Vice-chancellors want annual fees of £7,000 – which would push average debts at graduation up to an eye-watering £32,400, according to the organisation, Universities UK.

That will be a heavy price to pay for Tony Blair’s terrible blunder in introducing “topup”

fees in the first place, but a sadly predictable one.

Nearly six years ago, it was obvious that universities would come back for much, much more.

It was only rebel Labour MPs who managed to delay it this long, by extracting the promise of a further review.

On the one hand, vice-chancellors cannot be blamed. I read that they have been told to find £180m savings over the next two years, despite modest funding by world standards.

Yet who can doubt that the prospect of leaving £32,000 in the red will send shivers down the spines of would-be students and deter many from applying?

So what is the solution? Well, funnily enough, it is the one that I and many, many others argued for back in 2003 and 2004 – a graduate tax, but with an added twist.

Students would still contribute more for their passport to a better job – but, crucially, would be asked to pay back only what they can actually afford.

So, under the proposal put forward by the National Union of Students (NUS), a graduate on £40,000 would pay £125 a month, while someone on £16,000 would pay just £5.

After 20 years, according to the NUS, graduates would be coughing up £6.4bn a year – more than if universities were allowed to hike fees to £5,000 a year.

What could be fairer than that? The banker and chartered surveyor would pay more than the nurse, or social worker – just as they do in the current tax system.

Ah, but ministers will warn it would take longer to get the money back, which is where the added twist comes in, courtesy of Liberal Democrat peer Lord Smith.

His suggestion is to plug the funding gap by asking lucky ex-students who escaped fees to pay a “windfall tax” to help our struggling successors – say £5,000 for a three-year degree, or £12,000 for a master’s.

No one likes paying out more tax, but think of the students. Come on, get your wallets out.

JASPER Carrott used to joke that the nuclear industry was famous for talking b***ocks – and other strange side-effects.

The comic would have enjoyed this week’s confident boast that “effective arrangements will exist to manage and dispose of the waste that will be produced from new nuclear power stations”.

In fact, as I revealed on Tuesday, the waste will have to lie on site at Hartlepool and the other suggested locations for up to 160 years – even if an underground dump in Cumbria can eventually be found.