Nola Marino (Forrest, Liberal Party, Shadow Assistant Minister for Education) Share this | Hansard source

Growing our economy and encouraging the development of new businesses—the small businesses, the microbusinesses—has always been core business for the coalition. Startups and other entrepreneurial activity are a key part of this, especially around the small business space—the courageous, creative people who have ideas, passion and a willingness to invest their own money in small business or microbusiness, often having to mortgage their homes just to have a go. They don't always succeed immediately or the first time. The coalition, in government, delivered a number of major investments to support entrepreneurs and universities to commercialise their research—the entrepreneurs program that was cut by the Albanese government in the last budget and the coalition's $2.2 billion university commercialisation package, which I'm really pleased that the government has adopted and will deliver.

But as an opposition it is our job to hold the government to account and ask questions, which is what I will do as I move through my contribution on this bill, the Education Legislation Amendment (Startup Year and Other Measures) Bill 2023. This is the government's Startup Year program for students through an education or education accelerator program at the higher-education level. It creates a new category of student loan, the SY-HELP loan. Students who are participating in the accelerator program courses who are entitled to SY-HELP assistance can also potentially qualify for social security payments, such as youth allowance.

As a long-term advocate for regional, rural and remote students to have access to higher education and access to youth allowance, I note that what I've seen in this bill doesn't actually clarify whether all students, irrespective of where they live, will have SY-HELP available, or whether students from inner, outer and remote areas will also qualify for SY-HELP. I am very concerned. The last time Labor was in government they denied students from inner-regional areas access to youth allowance. It took my private member's motion, which passed in the House of Representatives, to get the government to acknowledge the fact that students in inner-regional areas, like those who live in my electorate of Forrest, cannot just drive an hour and a half or more every day to a university in the city—students from Harvey, Australind, Bunbury and beyond, who were deemed by Labor to not be eligible for youth allowance.

So, students living in these areas actually have no choice but to move to Perth to pursue their studies for many educational courses, like law, medicine and engineering. Last week a principal in my electorate said that kids are already self-selecting—those who cannot get access to youth allowance or whose family literally cannot afford to send them. So, they're self-selecting in regional areas. We already know about the underparticipation in higher education among people in regional communities. This is an important point that is not always understood on the other side.

In government we made significant changes to youth allowance which enabled many more young regional people to follow their education dreams. Interestingly, I was talking to a parent in Margaret River just last week. He has two children, who will both need to go to university in Perth. The family has calculated, under the current cost of relocation and cost of living, that it will cost their family $30,000 a year per child. So the family is now considering that they may have no choice but to move, and we will potentially lose those good people and their kids from the region. Unfortunately, this happens too often.

It also begs the question as to whether and how many regional universities and university hubs will be eligible or considered with this option to become new accelerators and, if so, how many and which universities will actually be eligible. For instance, will Edith Cowan University in Bunbury be selected or eligible? It has a very progressive, innovative deputy vice-chancellor who is strongly supporting their new university department of rural health, which I worked to secure while in government. The UDRH will provide research and training for nurses and other allied health workers in emergency medicine, aged care, mental health, disability, child and family health, and other community settings, including primary and secondary schools. ECU Bunbury is also hosting the first WA Creative Tech Innovation Hub.

If regional universities are not eligible or included, where does this leave our regional universities sector? It's a valid question to ask around this legislation. Regional universities around Australia will be asking not only me but the Labor government: 'Why not us?' For this Startup Year program, they will rightly be asking whether their regional universities will be eligible. Will our regional university centres—and we've got a few of those—be eligible to become incubators? Or will these students who go to these RUCs and communities miss out on an opportunity?

The bill certainly raises more questions than it answers, and we are right to ask those questions. In looking at the bill, it appears to me that the government has yet to do enough work and enough homework. It appears to be rushed, without the detail needed to back it up. The bill as it stands raises more questions than it answers. What is its actual purpose? Is it intended to build a pool of skilled entrepreneurs to create more microbusinesses and small businesses ahead? And if the entrepreneurs are innovators or inventors, they will certainly be facing the additional challenges of financing their ventures. We saw the collapse of the Silicon Valley Bank, and we've seen the amount of pressure there is to finance startups, whether it's through business loans, venture capital or even crowdfunding. These are very real issues, especially for these young entrepreneurs. Added to this, however, I understand that the government is considering axing the patent box tax break used by startups. I'll be watching that very closely in the upcoming budget.

Put yourself into the shoes of the students and those who are going to put their hands up for this program. This will be a loan, and they certainly need to be under no illusion that it is a loan that they will have to repay. A loan of up to $23,600 may result in a student incurring a substantial additional debt. The question I have is: what sort of actual academic credential goes with that $23,600? It is a significant amount of additional debt for each student to incur, particularly when we're in a situation of high inflation, and the SY-HELP loans are actually indexed to inflation. If you're the student, that's something you need to be aware of before you put your hand up. So it's a really serious decision for the student to make.

I noticed that on 17 March the Australian reported, in an article entitled 'Debt bomb for uni students', that three million graduates will face a $4.5 billion increase to student debt due to the high rate of indexation linked to high inflation. It is a serious decision for each individual to make, coming on top of high rent, increasing food prices and the general cost-of-living issues they face. So if you're a regional and rural student who has to go to a city to continue your higher education, as well as what you're already facing you have to work simply to be able to stay in university and study what you want to do to attend a metro university. It all adds up to a significant cost, and that's without the cost of going backwards and forwards to home, however far away that is.

Added to this, the Albanese government abolished the 10 per cent HECS discount. Students only needed to pay a minimum of $500 towards their course fee to actually receive a discount—a real benefit for a student. Labor's approach actually drives up student debt, given the combination of indexation and inflation. If you're a rural and regional student already facing significant costs, this just adds further and further. In government the coalition focused on helping students to pay down their debts as fast as possible.

As you would expect in this, Mr Acting Deputy Speaker Young, universities have rightly raised concerns that the SY-HELP funds are unlikely to fund a whole year's course. They will be assessing what value this is to their institutions in practical terms and in how they actually manage their course time frames and offerings. So how will SY-HELP loan funds flow, and when? Will they go to universities, or to students directly, and when? Will students be able to access any of the funding as startup capital, given that only courses of around six months are actually funded? So it may not be in the best interests of either students or higher education institutions. That's something that will have to be worked through by both the students and the institutions themselves.

Those students who are attending regional or smaller universities that don't have access to an existing accelerator or incubator program will be at a disadvantage. As someone who's a very passionate advocate for rural and regional education, students and families, that's something that I'll be really focused on in this offering. I think one question that the entrepreneurial students will need to know the answer to is whether they'll actually be able to retain their intellectual property rights in relation to the work funded through SY-HELP. Is it theirs? They will need to know this. Who will the IP actually belong to?

I also note that recommendations were made around an expert working group needing to be able to provide advice back to government around the purpose, the value proposition itself, the funding arrangements, including the flow of funds, and the implementation, such as accreditation and legislative requirements. These are very reasonable expectations. I know that the Group of Eight recommended that the Startup Year design be clear in its objectives—clarity upfront—about an accredited course model, given the complexity and lack of clarity.

There are some amazing young people out there. I know the Regional Universities Network also expressed serious concerns. There will need to be incentives for higher education institutions to form really solid and creative partnerships with local and broader industry. That link will be critical to fostering practical pathways to employment. These great young minds, these creative students, will help solve the problems and issues that businesses and the broader economy are facing and the challenges that the nation also faces.

A great question that I often ask young people is: what problem do you want to solve? I ask it because, let me tell you, they can and they will; they just need the right environment to be able to do so. This is probably why a number of university peak bodies have said that the Startup Year demands an evidence-based pilot program. It needs to be evidence based, but I hope—I really hope—that this includes regional universities. They are frequently the only option for those young people—and their families—who will never be able to afford other options. Those young people are currently self-selecting out of doing an ATAR because they know their families cannot afford to send them to university. What a tragedy. In this particular pilot, I'm expecting to see more than one regional university—different sizes, different locations, different types. This needs to be tested in those locations so that those universities themselves are actually able to offer the young people in their region the same sort of opportunity as is being offered in a metropolitan area.

We keep fighting in this space all of the time simply to get equal access and to give opportunity not just to the universities but to the fabulous young people who live and work in our communities. We do not want to see a constant brain drain from the regions, especially with what's ahead, and we've seen so much of the challenges that exist, whether it be about emissions or health challenges. We need those great young minds to stay in our regions. Even if they go away for higher education, we need them to come back. That's also why the young people who have no choice must get an opportunity to take advantage of these types of opportunities in situ, at our regional universities.

Debate adjourned.

Sitting suspended from 13:00 to 16:00

See this speech in context