Christopher Pyne (Sturt, Liberal Party, Leader of the House) Share this | Hansard source

Obviously, the government will not be agreeing with the Leader of the Opposition's motion. The Leader of the Opposition said that Labor was proud of their record in government and that they value education. Let me explain what Labor believed in, Madam Speaker, when they were in government. Let me explain what they did to higher education sector when they were in government—this is record that the Leader of the Opposition says he is so proud of.

In the 2013-14 budget, they saved $902 million by imposing an efficiency dividend of two per cent in 2014 and 1.25 per cent in 2015. They removed the 10 per cent HECS HELP up-front discount and the five per cent HELP refund bonus, saving $276 million. They converted the Student Start-up Scholarships to student loans, saving $1.182 billion. They put a cap on the tax deductibility of self-education expenses of $520 million. In the 2012-13 MYEFO, Labor's very proud record, which the Leader of the Opposition talked about, was a general interest charge on Student Income Support debt, saving $7.5 million. A pause in Student Start-up Scholarships indexation saved $103 million; a change in the rate of funding for the Sustainable Research Excellence program saved $563 million. They saved $200 million by delaying for a further three years the extension of Student Income Support to all students in coursework masters programs. They save $384 million in the cessation of facilitation funding; they saved $42 million by removing the eligibility to CSPs and help for overseas students; they saved $324 million for increased contributions for maths and science students; they saved a whopping $1.03 billion to reinstate band 2 student contributions for maths, statistics and science units. They reduced reward funding by $487 million and they reduced the HECS HELP discount and voluntary repayment bonus, saving $607 million.

In the period from 2011-12 to the time they left government, the Labor Party's proud record in higher education was to cut $6.66 billion from higher education. I table the document listing those cuts. That was the Labor Party's proud record of achievement in higher education and the Leader of the Opposition has the gall to come into the House this afternoon and try to lecture the government about higher education reform. What the Labor Party did was take the higher education sector for granted, assume they would always vote for them and use them as a cash cow to fund their profligate spending in so many other areas of government. So what this government is trying to do is fix the Labor Party's mess; we are trying to put the money back into the national collaborative and research infrastructure scheme, which Labor defunded. In fact, Penny Wong said in the Senate today that it was 'a lapsing program'—in other words, Labor had no intention of re-funding it. We want to re-fund the future fellows midcareer researchers so that midcareer researchers in Australia can access the Future Fellows program—it is another funding cliff left by the previous government.

We are trying to expand scholarships in Australia to make it the biggest scholarships program in Australian history so that more student—from low socioeconomic status background, from rural and regional Australia, from disadvantaged backgrounds—get the chance to go to university and transform their lives. In fact Michael Spence, the Vice-Chancellor of Sydney university, says that, if these reforms go through, he will be able to increase his scholarships from 700 a year to 9000 a year. I do not know which university the Deputy Leader of the Labor Party went to—it may well have been Sydney university—and her vice-chancellor, I assume, wants to increase the number of scholarships from 700 to 9000. And he says that will allow him to change the demographic make-up of his university from six per cent low SES to 30 per cent low SES. This is the reform the government is trying to bring in; this is the reform that the Labor Party and the Greens are blocking in the Senate. It is an expansion of opportunity.

We are also trying to expand the demand-driven funding system to pathway programs, sub-bachelor courses, diplomas and associate degrees so that any young person who wants to do a pathway program that leads on to undergraduate education can do so. Labor left the cap in place on those. They took the cap off undergraduate places, and we supported that. In spite of them not taking that policy to the election in 2010, we supported it because we thought it was the right thing to do. Julia Gillard, when she was the Minister for Education, and I negotiated an outcome that expanded youth allowance for rural and regional Australians—not as far as we would have liked but it did some good work—and we supported that reform.

We want to expand the demand-driven system to pathway programs because we know, because of the Kemp-Norton report, that young people who do pathway programs have a one per cent dropout rate; but, if they do not, they have a 24 per cent dropout rate. And who are the people who most use pathway programs? They are the low-SES students and the first-generation university goers.

Again, this side of the House is trying to expand opportunity at universities to support aspirational Australians, as has been our party tradition since we were founded in 1944 by Sir Robert Menzies—opening up the university system, creating universities across Australia. When Sir Robert Menzies was elected Prime Minister in 1939, there were six universities; by the time he left, there were 18 universities. He increased the number of students at uni by 10 times. The Howard government continued, and this government is continuing, that tradition of expanding opportunity, particularly for low-SES and first-generation university students.

We are trying to expand the Commonwealth Grant Scheme to non-university higher education providers. We are taking away the 25 per cent and 20 per cent premiums on VET FEE-HELP loans and HELP loans. Why are we doing that? Because it will help 130,000 Australians with the costs of their education, expanding opportunity by reducing the costs for those students. Our measures will lead to 80,000 more students a year getting the opportunity to go to uni by 2018. A total of 210,000 students will benefit from our reforms. They are the reforms that Labor and the Greens are blocking in the Senate. Through these reforms, we will improve the university system and make a big difference to students at university and to those who will go to university in the future.

Labor's alternative represents an existential threat to universities, because Labor want to bring back caps, they want to pay on outcomes, they want compacts with universities. This will lead to a $520 million hit in revenue to universities and lead to 37,000 fewer students. Chris Bowen, the member for McMahon, and Julia Gillard, the former Prime Minister, described the demand-driven funding system for undergraduate degrees as one of their proudest achievements. The current opposition, led by the shadow minister for education—who has led them up the garden path—are looking at slamming the door on those reforms that the previous, Labor government introduced. I am shocked that the member for Sydney, who is sitting at the table, would support that. I am shocked that the Leader of the Opposition would allow Senator Carr to run this agenda in such a way that it will shut the door on future students being able to go to university.

Many of the Labor Party's own figures agree with the government, whether it is Peter Beattie, whether it is Gareth Evans. People like John Dawkins, the former Treasurer, and people like Bruce Chapman are saying that the Labor Party needs to get into the conversation because higher education reform is too important to cede responsibility for it to the coalition. Andrew Leigh, the shadow Assistant Treasurer, has himself 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.'

So we know the Labor Party is split on this matter, when people like Gareth Evans support the reforms. The Chair of Regional Universities Network—which many of my colleagues who are here in the chamber today pay a lot of attention to, and they should—Peter Lee, the Vice-Chancellor of Southern Cross University, said today:

RUN urges the Senate to end the uncertainty for students and universities and to pass the package.

See this speech in context