In news that should make sceptics of even the government’s most ardent supporters on education, Business Secretary Sajid Javid has said that the repayment rate for £9000 tuition fees might be retroactively ramped up. My generation already bears a grossly disproportionate share of austerity: this development, quite frankly, takes the mickey.

When asked by the Business, Innovation and Skills Committee on Wednesday whether he would keep the rate at which students repay their loans the same, Javid said he couldn’t commit, due to budget pressures. He pulled out all the usual rhetoric, gave shout-outs to low income students, but the whole thing was like Cameron’s conference speech. It sounded OK, but the rhetoric masked a brutal agenda.

I graduated in July, and was in the first cohort of students on £9,000 fees. Currently, we don’t have to start paying it back until we’re earning over £21,000, and then we pay back 9 per cent of what we earn on top of that. Any remaining debt is written off after 30 years. If Mr Javid’s comment translates into policy, all three figures could be about to change.

This is a slap in the face for every recent graduate and current student. A frequent government defence of the £9,000 fees I paid was that the terms of repayment were very reasonable. It looks like we may have been cheated: they may yet go on to be anything but. The retroactive component particularly smarts. The previous terms were trumpeted as though guaranteed, and had they not been, I’m sure some prospective students would have turned down university. We didn’t think we signed up for this.

Maybe the comments should shock us, but I’m not sure they will; young people are ever-more frequently singled out for austerity. Sad as it may be, we’re used to it. In fact, only two weeks ago, Tory minister Matthew Hancock admitted that the raise in minimum wage wouldn’t apply to under-25s, because they are not “productive” enough to warrant a living wage. This was the government's much-spun budget centrepiece - but of course, it won't apply to a certain demographic, as apparently that's not worthwhile.

Let’s break down exactly what the Conservatives have done to young people, and young people alone, in the last few years. Student grants have recently been abolished, meaning the poorest students will no longer be given money to help them through university; it’ll be stuck onto their loans instead. This is designed to save £1.6 billion: a huge cut falling not just on young people, but the poorest young people.

Housing benefit is no longer available for 18 to 21 years olds, of course. This will push many young people further from work, as the homeless find it near impossible to secure jobs. Osborne’s the youngest chancellor for 120 years, but he’s targeting the young without remorse.

The Intergenerational Foundation’s recent ‘Fairness Index’ found that since 2010, there’s been a 10 per cent fall in prospects for young people in a range of areas including housing, education and health. The report showed that spending on education as a proportion of GDP is falling.

But some have it remarkably different. Osborne’s recently given pensioners a ‘triple lock’ on their money, meaning pensions will rise in line with one of three market trends. In practice, this has meant not just security; they’ve had a pension hike. This has happened despite the head of the Office for Budget Responsibility saying it will plunge Britain back into deficit within the next ten years. Fiscal responsibility, it seems, only matters when it comes to young people’s services.

The list stretches on. Pensioner property wealth now totals £861 billion, and recent generous saving bonds were only made available to those aged over 65. The ONS says that retirees saw their incomes increase by 5.1 per cent between 2007/08 and 2011/12.