Milton Dick (Oxley, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Hansard source

I've often spoken in this place about the government's priorities and how they impact on everyday Australians. Have you ever wondered where students and universities sit on the scale of those opposite? You need to look no further than this bill that we have before the House today.

I want to acknowledge the member for Griffith, who has moved a second reading amendment to this bill, the Higher Education Support Legislation Amendment (Student Loan Sustainability) Bill 2018, and place on record my thanks to her for moving this amendment, which is that the House declines to give the bill a second reading, because it attacks students and would undermine the fairness of Australia's world-class student loan scheme. I know the member for Griffith, alongside our deputy leader, Tanya Plibersek, had been listening and consulting with the student sector, as we all have as representatives in this place. In one way or another we all represent higher education students in our combined electorates across this country.

The bill attacks students. It simply attacks students and undermines our world-class loan scheme, which has been a proven success for decades. I want to place on record how proud I am that Australia's higher education system is world leading. It supports more than one million students, both international and domestic, and our universities, as we've heard, directly employ 120,000 people and support another 40,000 jobs. Our higher education system must be protected. But, just like with everything else, it seems this government is hell-bent on tearing it down. And this MYEFO package with $2.2 billion worth of cuts will be the fourth attempt of the government's. I say again: it is their fourth attempt, since coming to office, to cut universities and make students pay more. It's not just the second or third time; this is the fourth attempt they've had at going after Australia's higher education students with a cheap tax grab.

The government, as we know, are relentless when it comes to attacks on students. In last year's budget, they tried to make students start repaying their HELP debt when they started earning as little as $42,000. Now they're proposing a new rate of $45,000. How generous! The government want to increase the threshold and want to be congratulated for it. They simply either don't understand the ramifications that this bill will have on Australians trying to earn a living who have a uni or TAFE debt or they're deliberately targeting those who can least afford to pay it. Either way, in my books, it's a shameful act.

But this seems to be the common theme within the Turnbull government. Pensioners, jobseekers, young families, you name it—if you're a working Australian doing it tough, then you're in the government's sights. Whereas if you're one of the big banks you're in line for a tax cut. The hypocrisy is astounding. In this bill the government has raised the threshold from the previous attempt of $42,000 to $45,000, but the truth is it's still too low. $45,000 is barely more than the minimum wage, and would mean Australians with a HELP debt on low incomes would be required to make repayments. This change would also have a greater impact on women, particularly those who have returned to the work force part-time after taking parental leave. For example, Australians with a HELP debt earning $51,000, most of whom are likely to be women, will have less disposable income that someone earning, say, $32,000. How is that fair?

What the government doesn't like to talk about is that the lower repayment threshold for HELP debt will also apply to TAFE and vocational students who take out VET FEE-HELP or VET student loans. This means some of the hardest working but most modestly paid people in the country will be affected. That means people with a diploma or advanced diploma qualifications, like early childhood educators, enrolled nurses and technicians, will be caught up in this. We know that this week thousands of early childhood educators will be walking off their jobs as part of the Big Steps Campaign. They are highly qualified professionals, yet are paid one-third less than those teaching and caring for children just a few years older. Despite the incredibly important work they do, many early childhood educators are paid as low as $20 per hour, half the average national wage. Making matters worse is that 97 per cent of educators are female, which only further widens the gender pay gap in Australia. Because of these measures and their inadequate pay they will be paying their HELP debts well into their forties. These are the people who will bear the brunt of this government's awful piece of legislation we have before the House today—not big bankers, not executives and not those with mansions down by the harbour side. No, it will be childcare workers, teachers and nurses. It will be those who can least afford it. Once again, that doesn't seem to faze this government.

Australia's future economy will require a high-skilled workforce, and this bill does nothing to support it. In fact, the government is going out of its way and making deal after deal with One Nation, to prove that point. Just last week we saw One Nation, the so-called party of the battlers, do a deal to deliver $65 billion in tax cuts for the big end of town, in exchange for 1,000 apprenticeships. That is nothing more than a pathetic con job. It is selling out young Australians in particular. We know that since this government came to power Australia has lost over 140,000 apprenticeships—a decline of over 35 per cent.

Locally, the apprentices in my electorate of Oxley have been hit harder. Our community has seen the loss of almost1,500 apprenticeships, which is equivalent to a 43 per cent decrease, and the signs are that this will only continue to get worse. The 2017 budget cut a further $637 million from TAFE training and apprenticeships, and the government's proposed Skilling Australians Fund, which is supposed to deliver 300,000 apprenticeships, has been widely panned as unworkable. It seems the only thing the government is interested in is lining the pockets of the big banks and, as we know, foreign investors, while Australia's apprentices and students are left behind.

I wonder whether those opposite are actually aware of where Australia currently sits in the OECD as far as public investment in universities is concerned. Are we near the top? Not even close. About mid-range? Nah. Australia has the second lowest level of public investment in universities in the OECD, and this government only wants to make it worse. In contrast, our students already pay the sixth highest fees in the OECD. So we're towards the bottom, or the second lowest level, for investment in universities but our students are paying the sixth highest fees in the OECD. And we know that the fee hikes in this bill will only make that record worse.

I'm proud to represent the people of Oxley, in the south-west of Brisbane, in this place; however, for some of them things can be tough when it comes to going to university or TAFE. We know that high student debt is a genuine barrier to study for low-SES and disadvantaged students, so why would this government possibly want to make it harder for young people who are trying to pull themselves out of the cycle of disadvantage by furthering themselves at university or TAFE, and harder for parents who are trying to support their kids? We should be doing all we can to increase participation in higher education, not putting up extra barriers to further education and training, yet that is what this government is doing to young people in this country.

Picture this, Mr Deputy Speaker: four years from now, as a 22-year-old, you have recently graduated with a degree in engineering and you can't wait to take the skills and knowledge you learned at university and apply them to the real world. The past four years of university have been tough. Since moving out of home you have had to fork out the expensive rent that comes with living near enough to the closest capital city university. You've been working casually more than 20 hours per week—maybe in a cafe, maybe late at night—to support your study. But it's been made tougher since the government cut penalty rates. Sundays used to bring that little bit of extra cash to help with the groceries, increasing electricity costs or just getting to and from university on public transport, but getting your pay cut, as a young person, hasn't helped with this.

Nonetheless, you've graduated from university and you're ready to take on the world. However, you quickly learn that the job market is pretty tough out there and finding employment in your field isn't easy. The youth unemployment rate for people aged 15 to 24 is still double the national average. You're desperately keen to get your foot in the door, so you take an admin role at a leading engineering firm until something opens up for you. The starting pay is just 48 grand but it's better than nothing. You soon learn that, because of the government cutting the threshold for HELP repayments, your take-home pay is now even less.

On top of hoping to land an entry-level engineering job, you also hope to save a home deposit. But, as the government has done nothing about negative gearing, house prices have continued to rise. The average modest home on the outskirts of a capital city will now set you back $500,000. With tight budgeting you're able to save $50 per week. The bank will require a 20 per cent deposit, meaning you have to save $100,000. At your current rate, this will take 2,000 weeks to save, or the next 38 years of your life.

It's pretty sobering, but that is the story facing thousands of young people right across the country. It is the story I hear when I'm out doing mobile offices at Orion shopping centre or Jindalee Village or the Forest Lake village near my own home. Parents say, 'Milton, I'm worried my kids can't get a long-term job but I'm more worried that they'll never be able to have the great Australian dream.' What we're seeing today very clearly, in clear language, is: we're going to hit students with higher fees, we're going to give them higher bills and we're going to make them pay them off sooner.

Among my Labor colleagues on this side of the chamber I note the member for Macquarie, the member for Brand and the member for Chifley have been, in particular, outspoken advocates in the area of kids from disadvantaged backgrounds getting ahead. That is a key reason I'm in this place—to make sure that the kids who have the brains, the abilities and the talent can reach their full potential. It should be government helping them to do that. Instead, we've got a government with a lousy set of rules and bills before this parliament today that are simply not going to achieve that.

It's why Labor has recently announced a national inquiry into post-secondary education, a once-in-a-generation national inquiry that will look at every aspect of the vocational, educational and higher training systems to ensure they can best respond to the needs of Australia's economy and society. It's about making sure that Australians have access to the best post-secondary opportunities in the world. We all want our kids to get the education and the skills they need to thrive. We need to make sure Australians have the opportunities of lifelong learning. It makes good economic sense. We are competing against a fast sector across the South-East Asian market. If Australia is to be a wealthy, highly educated nation, we must boost participation in quality post-secondary education. It's pretty clear that other countries in our region are not doing what this parliament is doing tonight. They are investing in education and skills. Experts have warned that if we rest on our laurels Australia risks being left behind.

We on this side of the chamber know that we delivered real reform to our universities. We invested in universities. We lifted funding from $8 billion to $14 billion in 2013. We opened the doors to our universities to an additional 190,000 Australians, many the first in their family to attend university. Why did we lift participation in universities? Because it's good for the individual, but it's better for the economy. We know that a qualification, be it from TAFE or uni, can set you up for life. We know that many jobs of the future will require a post-school qualification. Yet tonight we are making a decision which is going to make it harder for kids to get ahead. The minister at the table may think it's funny. He may think what I'm saying is not serious, but the reality is that with this bill tonight we will make it harder for kids in his electorate and kids in my electorate to get post-secondary education.

We know the reason the government is keen on this. There's only one reason this government exists. Let's be clear: it's to make sure that those at the very top who rely on government support—the multinational companies and the millionaires—are looked after. And at what expense? The expense tonight, on this day of parliament and in this moment in time, is to slug the university students of today and tomorrow to pay for that. Well, I say I'm not going to support it. Bill Shorten and Tanya Plibersek, the Leader of the Opposition and the Deputy Leader of the Opposition, say that our side of politics will not support it. We believe in a better way—more importantly, we believe in a fairer way. Tonight I call on the government to abandon what I call a reckless policy that threatens the viability and future of students attending higher education, and to stand with working Australians and middle-class Australians—the people whom we are sent to represent in this chamber—to protect the right of every Australian to better themselves through university, further education, or TAFE.

See this speech in context