One of the things this 'financial support' system achieves is the very thing the current treasury is aiming to rid itself off. The issue of complexity. A poor student, if he or she goes to a £'9000' a year UNI', will pay nothing first year as regards tuition fee, due to a grant from the lottery, pay nothing second year due to university funding as part of an agreement (currently pending) with the government for charging above £6000, and then a third year, paid for by the government through loans.
So a student going to UNI' won't really know whether he or she is going to be in debts of £16,000 or £38000.
Further to the loss of government funding, I personally predict, that most if not all universities will go up to this threshold; and I only say this because if the government is wrong, and I'm predicting that it will be wrong, with it's assertions that only a few 'exceptional' universities will opt into this, then we get into a scenario where the treasury will overstep what it has put aside to fund these loans and so shall have to raise either, a, interest rates, or b, the fees themselves again, or c, both.
So I agree, this isn't the worst solution, of course it isn't, the government rejected the worst of the Browne review. But by and large, we need to go back to the drawing board and do our sums again.