Darren Chester (Gippsland, National Party, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Defence) Share this | Hansard source

Thank you Mr Deputy Speaker Mitchell, and it is terrific to have you in the chair. I respect the authority that you bring to that commanding position!

I rise to speak in relation to the Higher Education and Research Reform Amendment Bill 2014. I have spoken in the House many times over the past six years in relation to access to university and higher education. I do find it somewhat bizarre to listen to those opposite lecture the government on issues of equity and access after the way the previous Labor government botched the reforms to youth allowance.

For many regional MPs, the issue of youth allowance remains an issue of some great concern and a matter of unfinished business. I know it is not directly part of this bill, but it is associated in terms of the access issues. I continue to receive correspondence from my electorate in relation to the issue of youth allowance and the overall concerns about student income support. It remains a weeping sore for many regional communities, which do not necessarily have a local university that their children can attend and where parents are forced to pay upwards of $15,000 per year in accommodation and living-away-from-home costs. These are up-front costs and as a matter of fairness and a matter of equity, it is an area where I will continue to lobby cabinet ministers and seek the support of those opposite to address in the future.

I accept and understand that we have inherited a significant budgetary problem and that it will require diligence from the Treasurer, the finance minister and others to bring the nation's books back into order, but the issue of student income support remains a significant matter of concern. It is National Party policy to support an overhaul of that system. That was endorsed again on the weekend at National Party federal council here in Canberra, with the federal council calling on the federal government to implement reforms to increase financial support for students in a way that improves mobility and provides opportunities for regional students, communities and universities. Personally, I have advocated for a tertiary access allowance in the order of $10,000 per year to assist regional families with their living away from home costs. It is a public policy debate which flows out of today's discussion, which I am keen to continue to pursue with the relevant ministers and I will seek support from regional members.

Having said that, I recognise that today is a pivotal moment for Australia's higher education sector. This parliament has before it a bill that presents new opportunities for Australian students and particularly for Australia's regional students. The parliament has an opportunity today to introduce measures that will increase access to higher education and make our tertiary education system sustainable for the longer term while also making our institutions more competitive on the world stage. But it will also take courage—courage from those on this side and courage from those opposite—to look beyond the scare campaigns, to look beyond the shock and horror tactics of the student union movement and the efforts by those opposite to whip up hysteria without closely considering the facts. I congratulate the minister and the government for having that courage and the vision to take on a task that has been in the too-hard basket for way too long.

I reject the suggestion that was made many times during the contributions of those opposite that we have not consulted with the sector or with our communities. The consultation has been extensive at a local level and a national level. I have had the opportunity to meet with the Regional Universities Network and individual vice-chancellors on several occasions, and I also meet with students in my electorate. Quite recently I was invited to participate in a debate at the Gippsland Grammar School where the VCE students were keen to discuss higher education reforms. Obviously the students have a keen interest in the reforms because the students themselves will be among the first to study in the new deregulated environment, if indeed this legislation successfully passes the House and the other place. The students were aware of the scare campaigns and they were keen to get the real information and the real story on what this education reform would mean to them. Within a short time of the discussion beginning the tone changed dramatically as students came to understand that very little was going to change in terms of the up-front costs for them attending university—in fact, access to the loan system would continue to apply for them. They were reassured that the fundamental aims of these reforms, to encourage more students to go on and achieve their full potential, would benefit them in the longer term. I stand here proudly as a member of a regional community saying that I want more young regional people having the opportunity to achieve their full potential, whether that be going to university or TAFE or pursuing some other study after they finish high school.

One of the most compelling arguments for the legislation and the reforms put forward by the minister is that by 2018 we will provide an extra 80,000 higher education places supported by government subsidies. It surprises me that those opposite, who like to claim they support higher education, who like to claim they support regional students, are opposed to providing access for more students into the future. Those opposite are mistaken in thinking that there is nothing wrong with the system as it stands today, particularly from a regional perspective. The fact is that university participation rates are low in Gippsland as they are low in every other regional area. Only about 17 per cent of 17- to 22-year-olds in Gippsland go to university. The government's higher education reforms will make it easier for students from the country to get a tertiary education if that is the path they choose to follow, because they will have more choice and more options available to them. I fully support the minister in his endeavours to create new pathways and better pathways and exciting opportunities for students in Gippsland, and I will be looking forward to working with him on these issues in particular but also on the broader issue of access and equity when it comes to student income support.

It is a bit rich for those opposite to lecture the government when they left us with a legacy of debt and deficit to repay. It is all very well to say education should be free, as if no-one actually pays for this free education. Free education simply means one taxpayer paying for another person's education. The opposition left this government with a legacy of $1 billion per month in debt to repay—every month, month after month, until we get on top of the mess they left behind.

If we are going to talk about fairness we should really talk about whether it is fair for the former government to run the nation's books in so appalling manner as to leave us with a legacy of debt and deficit to repay and then stand in the way as we try to clean up the mess. It has become apparent that the current system is no longer sustainable. To ignore that fact would be entirely irresponsible, so I congratulate the minister and the government for taking the hard decisions and moving towards a more sustainable system.

The taxpayer currently pays for about 60 per cent of a student's education. We are asking students in the future to pay in the order of 50 per cent. Those opposite say they would like free education. I have heard it said many times. In an ideal world, perhaps, we would be able to pay for it all, and we would be inundated with students going to university with some taxpayers somewhere in this mythical Labor land picking up the tab. What about those who do not go to university? Why should they be picking up the tab for those students who do go to university?

Mr Champion interjecting—

I take up the comments from the member opposite that they might be a doctor, and that is why the government is prepared to meet—

Mr Champion interjecting—

If the member wants to interject—that is fine—I will take his interjection, but he does not need to keep rambling on incoherently, as he tends to do. I say to him in relation to support for someone becoming a doctor:, yes, we would support them, in the order of 50 per cent. The government is prepared to pay in the order of 50 per cent of that person's fees to go to university and would expect the student to make a contribution themselves. It must be noted, on the upfront costs, that students will still have access to the HECS system that has existed in the past. In fact, upfront costs are not going to be a barrier to people's attending university.

Through the program of reforms that the government has announced we recognise the particular challenges that face regional university students and people from low-socioeconomic backgrounds. The scholarship initiative contained in the reforms will see universities required to allocate $1 in every $5 for additional revenue to the scholarship scheme. I support that reform in the sense that it will allow more students from lower socioeconomic backgrounds, which obviously includes regional, rural and remote students, the opportunity to participate in the course of their choice.

The other point that is often made in relation to the opposition's complaints, or whinge sessions, about these reforms relates to the aspect of when a student has to start repaying their HECS debt. The simple fact of the matter, and the research supports me in making this claim, is that students who attend university, who go on to achieve a qualification, will earn more in their working life. It is not until they earn in the order of $50,000 a year that they will start paying back their HECS debt. It is a system that the Labor Party has endorsed in the past. It baffles me to hear the comments from those opposite over the last 24 hours, as they seem to be backtracking from a position that has had bipartisan support for many years.

In conclusion, I will reflect more specifically on the reforms and how they will affect the Gippsland region, in particular the new Federation University in Gippsland. Just as these reforms are a pivotal moment for the nation, they are pivotal for the seat of Gippsland because they will open more doors for regional students. The legislation before the House recognises the evolution of Federation University, which now has a campus in my electorate, in the town of Churchill. It is noteworthy that the Minister for education, in his second-reading speech on the legislation, singled out Federation University. He commended the merger of the University of Ballarat and the previous Monash University Gippsland campus as an example of regional institutions embracing innovation to meet the needs of their communities and create a learning experience that a student cannot get anywhere else. These higher education reforms will remove restrictions on our education institutions to allow them to come up with more creative solutions into the future, just as Federation University has done.

I make that point because to suggest that there is nothing wrong with the current system, when only 17 per cent of Gippsland students go on to university, is complete folly. We do need reform. We do need to find ways to encourage regional students—in my case, students from Gippsland—to go on and achieve their full potential. This bill also makes official the change in the name of the University of Ballarat to Federation University Australia. Those opposite who may follow social media—they may follow me on social media—would note that I am often promoting Federation University by wearing my Federation University T-shirt in various locations around my electorate and also on the USS Ronald Reagan during the parliamentary exchange program. It is a bit of fun, but it helps to promote the brand. I encourage Gippsland students who are looking to continue their studies after year 12 to consider the options available to them at Federation University, at the Churchill campus or at other campuses in regional Victoria. I am proud to have this institution in Gippsland, which gives a world-class education to young people in my electorate. Federation University has about 24,000 students and offers a wide spread of programs from certificates to PhDs, and it delivers its services across campuses right across western Victoria and Gippsland.

There are a couple of significant points about Federation University that I want to put on the public record. About one-quarter of its students come from low socioeconomic backgrounds, low-SES backgrounds. Interestingly, more than three-quarters of those students are the first in their families to attend university. That is an important point. Federation University, in its former guise as Ballarat University, has been successful in raising aspirations among families where children may not necessarily have thought, in the past, that university was a place that they could attend. I congratulate the university for its success in the past, and I look forward to working with it in the future to make sure that our regional areas grow stronger and capitalises on all the opportunities that exist in Gippsland to provide courses, locally as much as possible, or, when students are forced to travel or move away from home, to provide them with an enjoyable educational experience wherever it may be.

Interestingly, about 80 per cent of Federation University students find work within three months of graduating, which is the most successful rate for any university like it in Victoria. About 70 per cent of its students take up a job in a regional area—these are our future regional leaders—and that is an important point. We know that, if we can get regional students to university, if we can get them in the doors, if we can provide that access for them, they are more likely to come back and provide those services, those skills, in a regional environment. We know that, if we can give a country kid the opportunity to study medicine, law, accountancy or engineering, there is a very good chance that they will come back and make a contribution to the regional community into the future.

I strongly endorse every effort made by this government to improve access for regional students in terms of achieving their full potential. I reject the argument by some members opposite who have suggested that regional universities are at risk of becoming second-rate universities. That is not a 'glass half empty' argument, that is a 'we do not have a glass' argument. We need to be more optimistic and look for ways to be part of innovation in creating new opportunities for regional universities through these reforms.

As I said, I have met with the Regional Universities Network, I have met with the Vice Chancellor of Federation University David Battersby. I have discussed with him some of his comments in relation to the need for a regional adjustment package and I recognise that there are special circumstances that regional universities face. I believe his arguments have a great deal of merit. I am keen to keep working with the government and the minister to ensure that regional universities, like Federation University, have the opportunity to prosper under these reforms. Even more importantly, I want to work with the government and those opposite to make sure that regional students have the opportunity to achieve their full potential by pursuing university education, if that is their choice.

See this speech in context