Interesting that you immediately dismiss "a blog" as a bad source, but "a comic" makes someone "a poster child" for your view, especially when said comic clearly points out that it uses a source from 17 years ago.
You also have yet to present any "government surveys". All you found was an unsubstantiated claim by a trade union.
It seems it's all over the place.
No, it doesn't. The article clearly divides the breakdowns between the types of universities, thus showing a clear trend. Unless you're planning to claim that former polytechnics are the majority of universities (they aren't), or hire the majority of academics (they don't), your point is moot.
Are these figures even based on surveys, or are they averaging the listed requirements of universities?
Have you considered reading the article?
The source for the diminishing contact hours is stated as "A study of more than 17,000 UK undergraduates commissioned by the consumer group Which?" - from there on it's merely a quick Google search to find the study itself:
http://www.hepi.ac.uk/2013/05/15/2013-student-academic-experience-survey-produced-jointly-by-hepi-and-which/.
The teaching vs. research breakdowns, on the other hand, come from "The Conservative minister's treatise, Robbins Revisited, published by the Social Market Foundation thinktank". Again, jfgi and voilà, you have your source.
http://www.smf.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2013/10/Publication-Robbins-Revisited-Bigger-and-Better-Higher-Education-David-Willetts.pdfIt certainly does not sound like, according to your source, that professors are putting their research "first and foremost" to me.
Yes, Tom, but the problem here is that reality doesn't care about what things "sound like" to you. The figures are clear, and the trend is well established.
Also, just a friendly reminder: your only source so far is a quote-mine from a labour union's argument for why tenure is good. You have yet to patch this gaping hole in your argument.