Kate Ellis (Adelaide, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Youth and Sport) Share this | Hansard source

I begin by thanking the member for Lyne for raising this very important matter but also for his contribution to the debate so far and his continued advocacy for the people that he represents as well as for our education system. I know that he is genuinely interested in education and I want to reassure him and the good folk of Lyne that the government’s efforts to support students in rural and regional areas will continue.

I also want to acknowledge a couple of points he brought up, particularly the broadband announcement. It is very significant issue when we are talking about the education of young Australians. It is also very significant when we are talking about the opportunities which are available to those in regional Australia, and it is significant when we are talking about not just the education opportunities of regional young people but also the opportunities through health and the opportunities through communication, through bringing people together, to note that this broadband announcement is hugely significant for education but, beyond that, for building the nation.

I recognise that particular concerns have been raised both in this discussion already and also in the community more broadly around some of the recent announcements on youth allowance. I want to assure the House that I will come to these but, before we get onto the specifics of youth allowance, this is a much more general matter of public importance as it is about the education gap for rural and regional Australia more broadly. I want to assure the House that we are a government that believes in education for all. We believe that investing in education, in raising the educational opportunities for all Australians, is the pathway towards building a smarter, a better and a fairer nation. But we also recognise that students in rural and regional areas and their families do have specific needs, and there are barriers to their effective participation in education—particularly barriers to their effective participation in higher education, which is why as a government we provide a range of education investments which are specifically for rural and regional Australia. I want to take a few moments to go through some of these before we come in more detail to the recent debate about youth allowance.

We offer a range of different supports, including drought related support, including general income support, including student income support and including funding for schools. We offer assistance to farming communities and financial incentives to employers in regions which have been affected by drought. I note the member for Kennedy’s presence in the chamber today, although he has not had too much experience with drought problems recently. We also offer programs which are targeted at rural and remote schools and students, and other assistance to rural and regional students at school through the national education initiatives. As part of this debate, I want to talk about the contribution that the Building the Education Revolution initiatives and the huge modernisation of schools right across Australia are having on schools in regional Australia. The Drought Assistance for Schools initiative is part of a $715 million package of drought assistance for farmers, small businesses and communities in rural and remote Australia. It is a program that makes it easier for rural families to meet ongoing education expenses and the cost of educational activities such as excursions which may be prohibitive for families experiencing financial hardship as a result of drought.

In 2007-08 nearly $23 million was delivered to 3,030 schools in rural and remote locations across Australia. A further $23.9 million is available in 2008-09, and the program has been extended until 30 June 2010. Another program, the Assistance for Isolated Children Scheme, supports eligible primary, secondary and tertiary students who are unable to attend an appropriate government school because of their geographic location. It provides financial assistance to families to meet the cost of boarding and other expenses for their children. Another program, the Country Areas Program, is designed to help schools and remote communities improve educational opportunities and outcomes for students who are disadvantaged because of their geographical location.

In the area of training, the declared drought area incentive is designed to encourage primary producers who hold an exceptional circumstances certificate to continue to offer skills development and job opportunities to people living in a drought declared area. The Rural and Regional Skills Shortage Incentive program provides a special commencement incentive for rural or regional employers who employ an apprentice or trainee in an area of skill shortage. So a significant number of programs have been put in place with the very purpose of closing the gap and giving students the opportunity for a quality education, a world-class education, no matter what part of our country they may come from. We saw in the member for Lyne’s own electorate a number of projects which have been funded through the Building the Education Revolution program which I know have been warmly welcomed by both the member and the local community. The government has been very proud to announce those projects. I note also through the trades training program that nearly $3 million of funding has been awarded to the Taree High School to work with the Chatham High School and the Wingham High School in a project to refurbish and equip existing hospitality facilities—something that is really important and something this government is very proud to be able to invest in.

We have seen since the budget quite a lot of attention and debate, and in regional areas I think it is only fair to say some controversy, around the recent changes to youth allowance. I fully appreciate that the member for Lyne is particularly concerned about the impact of student income support changes and what that might mean for students within the electorate that he represents. I know he is quite genuine in his concern over some of these issues. I want to start by getting the facts on the record. It is important that we recognise that not every student across Australia gets youth allowance. That is the system. What we need to do is have in place a system where we determine who does get youth allowance and who does not get this income support; a system that is fair, a system that is transparent and a system where we can all be confident, and taxpayers can be confident, that the taxpayer dollar is being awarded in the most appropriate way.

That is why we believe the changes announced in the budget are so significant. Under the government’s reforms to be introduced from 1 January 2010, 100,000 students, including many from regional areas, are expected to get more youth allowance or to become eligible to receive youth allowance for the very first time. Under these reforms, we will be able to provide this additional support to thousands of Australian students and their families by retargeting the current system to assist those most in need. The reality is that under the existing system, which was implemented by the previous Liberal government, youth allowance is being paid to students whose household incomes are right up the income scale—$150,000, $200,000 and $300,000. These students are living at home in the city whilst attending university and their parents’ income is of that magnitude. We on this side quite proudly say that we want to see the money going to those who need it most. That is why we accepted the recommendations of the Bradley review—to ensure that student income support is received by those who need it most.

Before they saw the chance to run a misleading and untrue scare campaign, the opposition in fact said that they supported the changes. Amongst all the criticism and scaremongering which we have heard since the budget and all the work that members—and I will get to the member for Gippsland in a minute—are doing in their own communities, it is quite easy to forget the comments by the member for Sturt on 25 March. He said about these changes:

If the Government is serious about reform, then come Budget time we should see some consideration given to reforms suggested by Bradley in student income support—to ensure that sufficient support is going to those who need it.

That is what the member for Sturt said before the opposition saw the opportunity for this scare campaign. That is, of course, what we have delivered in the budget, but now many of those within the Liberal and National parties are running around and telling their communities only half of the story. So it is very important that we use this opportunity to set the record straight. The fact is that 100,000 students will miss out on more payments or miss out on higher payments to help support them attend university if these changes are not accepted. As I said, not everybody is entitled to youth allowance, so we need to make sure that it is directed fairly. What tighter targeting means is that we can afford to pay 150,000 students a student start-up scholarship, which is worth $2,254, each and every year to help them with their study costs. That is equivalent to an additional $87 a fortnight on top of the youth allowance that they already receive. Tighter targeting also means that we can afford to pay a relocation scholarship of $4,000 in the first year and $1,000 in later years to students, particularly from regional and rural areas, who have the opportunity to relocate.

See this speech in context