Josh Frydenberg (Kooyong, Liberal Party, Parliamentary Secretary to the Prime Minister) Share this | Hansard source

It is my great privilege to stand up and rebut this MPI. The member for Rankin should know better—the member for Rankin, who has a PhD, just like the member for Fraser. The member for Rankin and the member for Fraser should know that the future of the higher education sector in this country relies on deregulation. It relies on excellence. It relies on quality. It relies on choice. I am very proud to be a member of a government that has produced an important budget which will pay back Labor's debt—nearly $300 billion—over the next 10 years and will put in place measures which will encourage growth, encourage job creation and boost productivity. Central to that thesis is our higher education reforms, the greatest reforms in 30 years. We are the party of Menzies, and Menzies gave us the Murray committee and the Wills committee and an expansion in the university sector. This is the next stage in strengthening our higher education sector. You opposite have no ideas, no alternatives and no policies. The member for Maribyrnong gets up here in his budget reply speech full of cliches but no policies, no alternatives, no hope for the higher education sector.

The measures in this budget as they relate to higher education are a great leap forward for the sector. What do they do? For the first time they put significant government support in favour of students who are undertaking diplomas, students who are undertaking pre-bachelor degrees. For the first time they will receive significant support: up to 80,000 students will for the first time get their opportunity as a result of the federal government giving them support. We are saying to apprentices that they will be able to access government loans in the same way that tertiary students can, because taxpayers should not just support those people who go to university, they should also support those people who undertake apprenticeships.

What is more, in these reforms, $1 in $5 that is taken by the universities as a result of the deregulation in fees will go towards Commonwealth scholarships to help those from lower socioeconomic backgrounds and from the regions—the very people that you are now turning your back on by denying us support for these higher education reforms. Those opposite are standing in the way of a commitment by this government to increase the funding for higher education: $900 million of additional Commonwealth funding that will go to higher education and research over the next four years. And how much for schools? An extra $3½ billion in additional funding will go to schools as a result of this budget.

This is an education budget. This is a budget for the future of Australia and Australians. We are investing in higher education, in research, to the tune of more than $900 million in additional money over the next four years and $3½ billion of additional money to schools—money that would never have flowed if you had been successful last year in the election. Not to mention the $20 billion investment in the Medical Research Future Fund: the biggest investment of its kind anywhere in the world. That is going to be our legacy. That is what those opposite are in denial about.

When you see those students rioting about these changes, you could be forgiven for thinking that they were paying for their university education up-front. No, they are not. Do you know why? Because you do not pay $1 back on your university funding until your income is above $50,000.

Let me repeat that. You do not pay $1 upfront for your tertiary degree until your income is above $50,000. And what is more—and the Minister for Education has pointed this out repeatedly in the House, in the press and at every opportunity—even when, as a student, you have paid back your higher education fees through HECS-HELP you have only contributed 40 per cent of the cost of your higher education. Sixty per cent of the cost of your higher education is picked up by the taxpayer. That is an important point: even when you have paid back your HECS-HELP fees, you have only paid back 40 per cent of the cost of your degree.

As has also been pointed out, people who undertake a university degree, on average, earn 75 per cent more over their working lifetime than those who do not get the benefit of a university degree. It accounts to about $1 million extra income earned by those who have a university degree, as opposed to those who do not.

These reforms are not just about boosting the quantity of students who are able to get a good education, boosting choice and helping those in the regions to get the best education; it is also about excellence. Because when we look at the world rankings of universities, we see that Australia has five in the top 100 and not one in the top 30. We as a country put great emphasis on excellence and everything we do and, in most endeavours, we will be in the top 30 of the world. But not in higher education.

These reforms are designed to give universities flexibility and to empower them to take extra money and reinvest it in the classroom, in the best-quality teachers, in the best possible infrastructure, in the best possible technology and to compete against other universities, particularly in our region, which are receiving more funding.

I do not want you to take my word for the fact that this is a good package of measures, I want to read some of the third-party endorsements. The Regional Universities Network said, following the budget:

The Regional Universities Network (RUN) welcomes the announcement in the Budget of an ambitious program of reform for higher education which recognises the importance of the sector to Australia. The Treasurer and the Minister are to be congratulated for highlighting the important role Universities play in Australia's future.

What about the statement from the University of Adelaide's vice-chancellor, who is probably well known to the member for Hindmarsh:

The Federal Budget has outlined massive and much needed reform to the higher education sector.

What about the statement from outgoing vice-chancellor, Professor Ed Byrne, of Monash University, a university I was proud to attend? He said:

The approach in the budget lays out a series of steps for an ambitious deregulation of the sector.

The future of universities will be more in their own hands than ever before. Those are very powerful words. They are testimonies, as the member for Riverina has pointed out, of the significance of the budget reforms that we have put in place.

It would not be a speech in response to Labor's MPI unless we quoted the member for Fraser, the shadow Assistant Treasurer. I am quoting from Imagining Australia. I am not imagining Australia; I am quoting from Imagining Australia. I am not imagining this; this is from his book Imagining Australia. I bet he wishes he was imagining this! This is what the member for Fraser, the shadow Assistant Treasurer, said:

Australian universities (should) be free to set student fees according to the market value of their degrees. A deregulated or market-based HECS will make the student contribution system fairer, because the fees students pay will more closely approximate the value they receive through future earnings.

I could not have said it better myself. In fact, the member for Fraser should have been the first speaker on our side. This MPI is a load of rubbish, it is not even believed by those opposite. We have the better policies for higher education. (Time expired)

See this speech in context