Dan Tehan (Wannon, Liberal Party) Share this | Hansard source

I rise to talk on the Higher Education and Research Reform Amendment Bill 2014. This is a significant bill. This is a significant piece of legislation. This bill before us today is not about so-called reforms; this bill is about real reforms. It is about real reforms to the higher education system, which is a significant contributor to our society, a significant contributor to our gross national product and a significant income earner. Education is our fourth-largest export. Our higher education system now operates in a globalised world. Making sure that it can operate in that globalised world is vital. Already, we are seeing other countries competing with our higher education system. If we do not allow our higher education system to compete with other universities, whether they be in New Zealand, Asia, the US, the UK or anywhere else, then we are tying our higher education system down; we are shackling our higher education system. In doing that, we are shackling the future of our children.

These reforms are important, and they are especially important because of the situation that we have been left with, the situation that we face coming into government. As Paul Kelly so brilliantly articulated, Labor made a cart when it came to higher education but they did not provide a horse. I will just say that again, because it is important: the Labor Party made the cart but they did not provide the horse. So what did they do? They said, 'We're going to have demand-driven places in our universities, so universities can open themselves up. And we will make the system of how they bring students in demand driven.' But they did not deregulate the fee base. They said, 'We want you to take all these students, but we're not going to give you the ability to fund it.' As a matter of fact, not only did the Labor Party go to a demand-driven system but they actually took money out of the higher education system as well. So they shackled the higher education system. What the Minister for Education and the government faced was a system which did not have the ability to innovate and compete. These reforms are about giving our higher education system that ability to innovate and compete.

I am happy to place on the record here my belief that this is the true reforming part of our budget. This is the most significant reforming element of our budget, without doubt. What we are doing here to our higher education system will set it up for the decades to come—will give it the ability to compete in a globalised world against other countries.

To those opposite I say: look around you and look at the examples. We already have universities in New Zealand that are coming to Australia and advertising to take our students so that they will go to New Zealand to study. They are there saying, 'Come and get educated in our universities; it will cost you less and you will get a better education.' We are not giving our universities the ability to go to New Zealand and do exactly the same to them, and we should.

I would like to touch on one thing that the member for Indi said about what this will mean for universities in regional and rural Australia. What it means for our regional and rural universities is: for the first time, they can compete on cost. They can offer degrees, on a basis competitive with those being offered in the large capital cities, to attract students to regional and rural areas. They can do it on the price of the degree. They can also do it on the cost of living in those areas. So they will have two advantages over those capital city universities to attract students to their campuses. This is a game-changer.

At the moment, if you look at, for example, my electorate, where I have a Deakin University campus, that Deakin University campus in Warrnambool has to offer degrees at exactly the same price as the campus that they have in Geelong and the campus they have in Melbourne. There is no ability for that university to differentiate between campuses on the price of a degree. If they were able to, and if they were able to provide that at a cheaper price—and the cost of living there, we all know, is a lot cheaper—then we could attract more students to that regional campus rather than fewer, because at the moment there is no ability for that campus to compete. So these reforms, for regional and rural Australia, offer a significant advantage to our regional and rural campuses, and I think that this is one of the big, big wins from these reforms.

There are other issues which this bill deals with. For the first time, we are offering HECS or HELP to those people who want to get a tertiary degree. This is also significant because, once again, especially in regional and rural Australia, there are students who want to make sure that they can afford to get a tertiary degree. And why shouldn't we give them the same opportunities as we give to those who want to get a higher education degree? Once again, common sense—practical solutions to problems, which I know, in my electorate, and in other electorates in regional and rural areas, will be extremely well regarded.

It is interesting to see what those opposite have said on this issue. I have a transcript here of the former Minister for Employment Participation—Minister Ellis, as she then was—in an interview with Linda Mottram on Monday, 16 April 2012. She was being asked about HECS-style loans for TAFE students, and she had this to say:

Oh look, I'm incredibly excited about this. I know that upfront fees have meant that it has acted as a barrier to some people being able to take up their skills, their trades training and that this HECS-style scheme will ensure that everybody has the opportunity to access this form of education and training, like others.

So I am hoping that the former minister for employment will be incredibly excited about the reforms that we have brought before this House here today.

See this speech in context