Andrew Southcott (Boothby, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Employment Participation, Training and Sport) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Without a doubt the expansion of international education in Australia over the last 25 years has been a great success story. Of course, Australia has been taking international students since 1904. The Colombo Plan, which ran from 1950 to 1967, was a very far-sighted plan and the first real large-scale expansion of international education. But over the last 25 years we have seen an expansion of international education to the point where, based on 2008 data, education services is now the third largest export for Australia. Only iron ore and coal are larger in terms of export income. Education services is the largest services export. Education services currently bring in more revenue than the leisure travel sector. In 2007-08 education services was the largest export for the state of Victoria. At July 2009, there were 547,663 enrolments by full-fee international students in Australia on a student visa. China remains the largest source country, followed by India, Korea, Malaysia and Nepal. China and India together account for more than 40 per cent of international students studying in Australia. But there are other nationalities outside the top five which together also account for more than 42 per cent of international students. According to the UNESCO Institute for Statistics, Australia is the No. 1 destination for overseas study in Hong Kong, Indonesia, Malaysia and Singapore. We are No. 2 in India, Sri Lanka, Kenya, the United Kingdom and Thailand. We are No. 3 in Japan, South Korea and the United States.

Significantly, the vocational education and training sector has seen growing enrolments, with July 2009 figures indicating a 39.4 per cent growth in enrolments. Only recently, commencements in VET outstripped commencements in higher education. That has occurred only over the last 12 months. So it goes without saying that it is absolutely critical that we as a country get this right. The opposition believe that it is important that we have international education on a sustainable foundation going forward.

There are several areas which need to be addressed for this important national enterprise to continue. Firstly, the welfare of international students while studying in Australia is critical to maintaining our strong enrolments and strong reputation as a provider of quality education, and I note that the Senate have a committee which is specifically looking at this very issue and is due to report next month. Secondly, the effectiveness of the regulation of the education sector, both higher ed and vocational education and training, needs to be improved. Thirdly, we need to address any pull factors which are occurring with the interaction with Australia’s migration program so that the provision of education is sustainable.

In recent developments, there has been a rapid increase in the number of international students choosing to undertake VET courses in Australia, partly as a result of changes to migration eligibility. As a result of this high demand, there has been a dramatic increase in provider numbers as providers seek to benefit from this demand. This has resulted in increased pressure on state regulatory bodies, who may struggle for adequate resources to monitor all these providers, allowing some unscrupulous providers to operate. Recent reports have acknowledged poor-quality education and substandard facilities at some providers, with some registered providers enrolling more than the allowable number of overseas students. As a result, hundreds of international students have either needed to be placed with new registered providers or been refunded their course fees through a tuition assurance scheme or the ESOS Assurance Fund.

As for the overall quality of education in Australia, while there have been some recent high-profile cases of education providers who have left students stranded, I want to emphasise that the vast majority of the education sector is offering quality education and training. It is a source of national pride that in many Asian countries we are now one of the destinations of choice, ahead of their more traditional markets like the United States or the United Kingdom.

I mentioned before some of the current inquiries in this sector. As problems have emerged with the minister’s handling of her numerous portfolios, the opposition, through the shadow minister for immigration and me, called for an independent inquiry into international education. We therefore welcomed the bringing forward of the review into the ESOS legislation by the Hon. Bruce Baird in early August 2009. Reflecting the importance of getting this issue right, there are a number of further reviews. We await the Senate inquiry into the welfare of international students; the committee will be reporting back to the Senate in November. The Senate Education, Employment and Workplace Relations References Committee is also examining this legislation, and I know many stakeholders have made submissions to the committee to put their point of view.

We welcomed the international students roundtable, but we were concerned that the minister was more interested in hearing from students from the Group of Eight universities and from high-end VET providers than students from the smaller VET providers, who now represent the majority of international students in Australia. As Minister for Social Inclusion, this was one exercise where she was not inclusive enough.

Importantly, the legislation that this bill amends provides the regulatory framework from a Commonwealth point of view. The ESOS Act includes provision for registration on CRICOS, compulsory membership of a tuition assurance scheme, contributions by providers to the ESOS Assurance Fund and the compulsory national code and sanctions. There is some overlap, and states and territories are the responsible jurisdictions for quality assurance—and that is where many of the problems arise.

The Skills Australia report Foundations for the future: proposals for future governance, architecture and market design of the National Training System of June 2009 identified a number of weaknesses in the current operation of the regulation of education providers. In summary, to quote from the report:

Our quality assurance systems should support quality improvement and recognise excellence and high levels of performance.

It said there was a need for ‘quick action and consistent approaches on poor performance’, the current operation ‘limited the ability to swiftly deal with under-performers’ and:

… the current system controls at entry point and is not good at intervening without complaints from students …

The Skills Australia report highlighted the need for risk management by the state and territory regulators; with more than 4,000 providers, states and territories should be doing a risk rating for each provider. There is a problem with the state registration and course accreditation bodies reacting to emerging problems. The Skills Australia report recommended strengthening ‘AQTF risk management protocols, scope for interventions and treatment of sanctions to enable rapid national response to poor RTO performance’.

Turning to the ESOS Assurance Fund, the majority of providers are members of a tuition assurance scheme; however, if the tuition assurance scheme is unable to source an alternative place for a student then they may be referred to the ESOS Assurance Fund. The ESOS Assurance Fund was established to protect the interests of overseas students, whether currently studying or planning to study with registered providers in Australia. Its intention is to refer students to alternative providers if their provider defaults or, if no suitable alternative is available, to refund moneys paid. The ESOS Assurance Fund is financed by contributions made annually by registered providers. However, over the last year in particular, there has been a significant increase in calls made on the fund, depleting reserves. There are now serious concerns held as to whether the fund remains solvent.

The opposition’s position, as I said at the beginning, is that this is very important to Australia. It is good for international students and it is good for Australian students to get the cultural interaction. But it is also a very important source of export income for this country. It is our largest services export and our third largest export, behind coal and iron ore. We believe that it is important that we have a very strong foundation so that the education services industry is sustainable going into the future. We support measures which will enhance confidence in the sector.

We support the principle of this bill. However, we believe that focusing on re-registration and publishing the list of education agents does not address the problems which have been identified. The major problem in this area is the capacity of state and territory regulators to act quickly and to identify emerging problems. There is a major problem with the lack of risk rating by the state and territory jurisdictions. We should be moving to a quality assurance system which supports quality improvement and recognises excellence. We believe there is a need for a better risk management approach, and that has been ignored by the minister in her response to the problems encountered by international students. As a result, while we support the intent of the bill and will support it at the second reading stage, I will be moving a number of amendments during the consideration in detail stage. These should be circulated during my speech in the second reading debate. These amendments relate to a risk management approach being used by the state and territory regulatory authorities, the requirements for education agents being used by education providers and more transparency for the ESOS Assurance Fund. I will address these amendments during the consideration in detail stage.

Graham Perrett (Moreton, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise to speak in support of the Education Services for Overseas Students Amendment (Re-registration of Providers and Other Measures) Bill 2009. In recent years we have seen a growing number of students from overseas enrolling in our wonderful Australian universities. Australia is home to more than 300,000 overseas students: 70,000 from China, 60,000 from India and increasing numbers from Scandinavia, Canada, the US, Britain and other European countries. Closer to home we have many students from South Korea, Indonesia, Malaysia and Thailand. In fact, despite the global financial crisis, overseas enrolments ballooned by 21 per cent this year.

It is a vote of confidence in Australian universities and proof that an Australian degree is highly regarded around the world. Universities like Griffith University, in my electorate, the Queensland University of Technology, where I did my teaching and law degrees, and the University of Queensland, where I did my literature studies, have world standard names because Australia is a very, very attractive place to study. We have great people, an intriguing and engaging landscape, a great climate—at least in Queensland—and a very welcoming, multicultural society. Young people want to come to Australia, want to be educated in Australia and want to experience Australian culture. Overseas students and their families spend more than $14 billion a year in Australia. Access Economics estimates that this creates an extra $12.6 billion in goods, services and jobs. That means overseas students contribute more than $26 billion to our economy—making education our third biggest export. But, of course, their contribution is not just financial.

It is interesting when we think about students in purely financial terms. Certainly, in Queensland, when comparing what overseas students are worth, we could look at them in financial terms as a coal train. If we thought about students as a coal train, there would be about two students per wagon. If we were to think of those 300,000 students as coal wagons, there would be 132,075 wagons, or a train nearly 2,000 kilometres long, stretching from Brisbane to Sydney and back.

However, as I said, we do not need to think of them in merely financial terms as they contribute to and do other things for our community. Overseas students contribute to the broad tapestry of Australian multiculturalism and they also ensure a diversity of thought in our universities and in our broader community. They also do some of our less desirable jobs, such as late night taxi-driving shifts, which are not always the top jobs as you do not always see humanity at its finest. Griffith University’s Nathan Campus in my electorate is home to 3,700 international students and the community on the south side is richer and stronger for having them. In fact, many of those students attended the south side summit that I held in August.

Unfortunately the downside to such rapid growth in the overseas student sector is that it has allowed an unscrupulous few to subvert the system. We have seen a situation where some education agents exist only to provide a back door for students to gain residency. And, unfortunately, some of the students who come to Australia to learn and to take advantage of our universities are also taken advantage of. I saw an article in the Australian the other day about a house in my electorate which had 37 students living in it. I thought that that would have been the Australian record but apparently there was a Melbourne house that had even more students, which is quite an enviable record and one that I do not wish to break. There is increasing concern about the quality of advice that education agents are providing to prospective international students as well.

The Education Services for Overseas Students Act works in tandem with immigration laws to ensure that education providers collect and report information relating to student visas and to regulate minimum standards, tuition and financial assurance. It is about ensuring that international students receive a quality education in Australia and, on the flip side, that international students meet the conditions of their student visa. This has been a concern passed on to me by some of my constituents. They want to be sure that these international students are doing the right thing. Unfortunately, there is the occasional rogue, but most of them are just hardworking students studying and doing the right thing. I did hear a funny story on the weekend from one of the local councillors in my electorate who, strangely enough, found that an illegal brothel had opened across the road from him. The brothel was run by an international student. I am not sure whether they were a business student or not. I recognise their acumen, but that is not the sort of international student we are trying to attract. Needless to say, the councillor got the brothel closed down pretty quickly.

If Australia is to maintain its reputation as a quality education provider, we need to ensure that international students are offered the best possible education in their chosen degree or trade. This bill will ensure that only genuine education providers with a track record of providing quality education to domestic students will then be allowed to provide education to overseas students. The bill amends the Education Services for Overseas Students Act 2000 to require all institutions on the Commonwealth Register of Institutions and Courses for Overseas Students to re-register by 31 December 2010. So there is ample time and ample warning. To gain registration, providers will need to demonstrate that their principal purpose is to provide education.

The bill also tightens the screws on education agents by requiring providers to publish the names of education agents who represent them and to meet regulations concerning their agents. This bill is about ensuring that only genuine education providers can provide education to overseas students. As I said earlier, they are a very valuable resource and must be protected. We have seen how just a couple of idiots on a train can damage our good name overseas. We unfortunately saw that happen in India. All of that great work done by our universities to attract and engage students can be knocked away very quickly by a couple of drunken idiots attacking a couple of overseas students. We need to do what we can to protect our brand. It is a great brand and we must do all that we can to protect it.

As with any growth industry there are always a few cowboy operators who are only in it for the quick buck. The bill that is before the House lets them know that there is a new sheriff in town. This bill will put an end to such behaviour. It does so by introducing enforcement measures that will encourage compliance while not putting undue pressure on providers. It will give the Commonwealth the flexibility it needs to enforce the law while not putting education providers under financial pressure. As the law stands, a provider under suspension must continue to teach students but is not permitted to collect fees.

Importantly, our reforms to education services for overseas students will not end with this bill. The review of this legislation will examine how the current arrangements support students, deliver quality education, are effectively regulated and ensure the sustainability of the sector. I understand the Baird review will report early next year and show us other initiatives that we can bring in to improve this sector.

My electorate office is surrounded by overseas students and the agents who initially lure them to Australia, so I well understand how important overseas students are for my community and for the local businesses that service them. I mentioned Griffith University in particular, but a lot of students live in my electorate—because of the ease of life and great food—and then travel to the other universities, such as the University of Queensland and Queensland University of Technology. So I understand how important it is that we look after these numbers. As I said, we should think of it as a coal train—I could not easily find a wheat train comparison. I know the number of coal trains that it would take to bring in the sort of revenue that these overseas students do.

Through this bill, the Rudd government is responding to community concerns to ensure that Australia continues to stand tall as a destination of choice for overseas students. We know that our near neighbours are doing what they can to set up universities. They are doing what they can to make sure that they are in competition with us, so it is important that we protect the great brand of Australian universities. The bill before the House goes some way to doing this, and I commend the bill to the House.

Sharman Stone (Murray, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Immigration and Citizenship) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise with pleasure to talk on the Education Services for Overseas Students Amendment (Re-registration of Providers and Other Measures) Bill 2009. In a previous life, before entering parliament, I was a manager for international development at the University of Melbourne. Much of my time was spent talking with parents and institutions offshore and looking at what opportunities there were at Melbourne university for overseas students to study medicine, law or commerce. I have to say that our university sector has, very deservedly, an extraordinarily good reputation for offering excellent education to overseas as well as domestic students.

A problem has come about because we have had a huge blossoming of the vocational education and training sector, which too often has been a visa factory with the objective being that students come to Australia and study for as short a time as possible before being able to apply for permanent residency—with all of the rights that come with permanent residency—leading to migration. We have seen in recent times, very sadly, that perverting of the educational objectives of international education in order for it to lead to migration. The outcomes have been exploitation and disappointed students finding very poor courses. There has been the debacle of students trying to live on very little after coming to Australia with very poor financial backing and with the expectation that they will be able to work quite easily in the Australian economy while they put themselves through a year or so of training.

Of course, as a coalition we very much support any measures that will restore the integrity and reputation of the Australian educational offerings, from the tertiary sector down to the VET sector, but we are concerned that while this bill has honourable objectives—that is, to have a much more rigorous registration of providers and to require agents to more fully account for themselves and have their bona fides on record—we do not think it goes far enough and, as has been foreshadowed, amendments will be proposed.

We are also concerned that the international students are being left very much in the lurch when it comes to fully understanding what changes the Labor government has made to the prerequisites for permanent residency. These international students have already come to Australia and have often paid very substantial fees and other costs in the expectation that what they are doing under the MODL course process will end with their gaining permanent residency. There are over 225,000 students who have come to Australia to do courses like hairdressing, cooking, community welfare studies and the like. They have gone to colleges which did not expect them to do more than about a year of study but with 900 hours of work experience. They were right when they came here in understanding that such a course of action and a certain level of English language facility would pretty assuredly lead them into a permanent residency outcome. Now the rules have changed and, using a Critical Skills List rather than the MODL list, the same number of points is not going to be allocated for permanent residency or migration for courses undertaken like cooking and hairdressing.

The difficulty is that, like the youth allowance debacle that is currently raging across Australia, the rules were changed midway. In the case of independent youth allowance, we have thousands of stranded Australian rural and regional students who will now not be able to access Australian university education. In this case we have got tens of thousands of international students who were complying with the criteria the day they came to Australia and who are frustrated by changes to what they thought they were buying. They are finding out about those changed rules on the grapevine; hence, we are seeing these public expressions of frustration and distress. I am absolutely understanding of those expressions. We really do need to have much more transparency about what the new rules and conditions are for those students who come here to study, particularly in the vocational education and training stream. We need to make sure that the offshore agents understand the new rules that will now be put in place in relation to the Critical Skills List being the key referent for permanent residency rather than the old MODL list. I am meeting students who are coming to Australia and still being misinformed by the agents back in India, Bangladesh, Nepal and similar places.

There is in this bill an intention to improve things, but what is being offered is simply that agents should undertake online accreditation or, failing that, the education agent should be a member of a recognised professional body in the countries in which they are working. This is still very open to abuse and misuse in countries where there is not sufficient supervision from the Australian High Commission or our embassies. We still cannot expect that all education agents in these offshore countries are going to be saying the right thing to their students if there is not a requirement that the student presents themselves in person to an Australian official from either DIAC or DEEWR. At the moment there is no requirement that the student has to be personally examined about their IELTS or English language facility. That can be done at arm’s length and we know about the scams that exist there. There is still not a proper requirement for adequate numbers of dollars to be lodged for students to ensure that they do not immediately become vulnerable to exploitation in the job market when they land in Australia. There could be exploration of a trust where the student’s living requirements in terms of funding, including their fees, are placed so that there is not this desperate need to go and work for $2 or $3 an hour in a 7-Eleven at two o’clock in the morning where they become very vulnerable as they stand on a station, say at Noble Park, to criminals that may attack them at that hour of the night.

This bill does not even begin to touch the surface of the problems that currently exist. I have great sympathy for those students who have come to Australia, perhaps from places like the Punjab in India, whose parents have borrowed and put every cent of the family’s spare cash plus more into their obtaining a migration outcome from the course that they are to attend in somewhere like Flinders Lane in Melbourne. The expectation is that the student, having obtained permanent residency, will become the pull-through for the family’s migration to Australia. With the rules changed part-way through, you can imagine the extraordinary pressure, the stress, the shame and the loss of face for that young person who knows that so much was invested in them personally to be the salvation for their family back home, a family that could not have expected to migrate under any other of our Australian rules and regulations.

This is a very difficult and ongoing problem. This bill aims to do better, but it does not do enough. I am afraid we already have scams jumping up in Australia which take advantage of courses that are listed on the Critical Skills List as alternatives to what used to be on the MODL list—the list of reference for permanent residency. For example, I have been told that in Adelaide there are already colleges or registered training organisations jumping up that are processing lots of international students in a factory-like way to go into the aged-care sector. Similarly, there is great concern that there are numbers of international students who will become automotive engineers now being churned through quite questionable study centres.

Where is the vigilance of this government? In closing down, for example, colleges of hairdressing and cooking which hardly had any equipment and did not have bona fide or well-qualified chefs and other trainers, the government simply has not watched what else is coming to replace those types of courses. A very tragic situation was reported to me in my electorate recently by a young couple from India, who came to see me about it. The woman was a qualified doctor who had trained and had been practising in India for a number of years as a GP. She had paid a very substantial amount of money to an agent in India for the advice that her best way to migrate to Australia was via her undertaking a community welfare studies course in a very questionable college in Flinders Lane in Melbourne. She came to that college and she brought her husband with her. He does not speak much English but she speaks very good English. That college collapsed and was liquidated. She was then directed to another college. She is now pregnant, with just a few weeks to go before the birth of her baby. She was so badly advised by that agent that she has wasted a fortune in funds and some 12 months of her life. She should, of course, have tried to enter Australia as a qualified general practitioner. As a woman willing to practise in a rural area she could have had a pathway to more legitimate entry. She is not the only person, nor will she be the last, in that situation. There have been thousands of students who have been similarly badly advised.

This government has to understand that, just like with the boat people, where there are enormous pull factors bringing those people down to Australia and risking their lives in the process, there are pull factors in our international student sector which are enticing agents to misrepresent the facts, leading people who cannot expect migration through any other pathway to think they can buy their way into Australia and do poor courses in very poor colleges that damage the reputation of Australia. Simply having those colleges re-register on CRICOS by a certain date is not going to do very much at all to clean up the act of all those in this sector. It is one of our largest export earners, but that fact alone should not be what drives change or better scrutiny in the sector. The fact is that we have a quarter of a million young to middle-aged people thinking they have a chance to have a decent education or, alternatively, a pathway to migration. Too many of them are having the wrong experience in this country because of poor vigilance, poor monitoring of the sector, very poor coordination between the states and the Commonwealth, passing of the buck to and fro, audits not being properly undertaken and no consequences when one college closes and the operatives of that college re-emerge down the road offering the same sorts of courses with the same fee structure.

This is a case of an international student sector which is being very poorly managed. It has put at great risk the reputation of Australia, which is in a highly competitive market in terms of attracting international students. It has made us a laughing stock in countries like New Zealand, Canada and the US, who for years—I am talking about the middle and late 1990s—were in awe of Australia’s capacity to attract good students. Those countries now have the bounty of additional good students going in their direction because of Australia’s failure to properly address an industry sector that is riddled with scams and exploitation and is making a lot of young people’s lives a misery.

We have heard about the hot-bedding of students who have no accommodation option but to live in Third-World standards in rented accommodation. There are students who hardly ever go to their colleges because they know they can get a certificate which will simply tick off that, yes, they have done the required number of hours. All of this continues. We know it continues because, as shadow minister for immigration, I have students coming to me complaining and I have the colleges which do the right thing and which offer excellent education complaining that they are being dragged into the reputation meltdown while they do the very best for their students and offer excellent education.

I call on this government to try a bit harder and to be more realistic when it talks to its state colleagues, its state Labor governments in particular, about their failure to properly audit and properly resource the work that they should be doing. This legislation is obviously an attempt to address some of the issues out there, but it is a pathetic attempt. It still leaves most of the students uninformed about other changes Labor has made. One that I am very concerned about is the recent abolition of the 45-day rule. That rule in the coalition’s time as the government of Australia said that you had to apply for asylum within 45 days of your arrival in this country. I am concerned that with Labor’s abolition of that regulation we are going to see a lot of these students so desperate to deliver what their parents expected—which was a migration pathway as a result of their $30,000, $40,000 or $50,000 investment—that they are going to put their hands up at the end of their cookery or hairdressing course and say, ‘We now seek asylum.’ They will do that knowing that they will have access to the workforce for as long as it takes this Labor government to work through their vexatious claim and to work through all of the reviews if that claim is rejected. That will give them some further time to hope that the rules are changed, to perhaps find a partner in Australia, to perhaps somehow slip through between the stools so they do not have to leave this country.

This is all, sadly, another example of an incompetent government that does not make the hard decisions, that ignores the full implications and impacts of what it does legislatively and through regulation change. I have to say that when the coalition were in government we very much understood that there are unscrupulous operators always wanting to take advantage of the vulnerable and that, when it comes to proper regulation, we have to be strong and firm but just. We understood that we cannot simply by stealth, if you like, change the rules without letting the stakeholders know how the rules have been changed without expecting them to arc up and say, ‘What about some transition clauses?’ That is what a lot of these students will be asking for when they discover that they came to Australia under one set of criteria and spent a lot of their families’ cash in trying to achieve an outcome which at the time was legitimate, but now the rules have changed. What is this government going to do with those thousands and thousands of students who will be thwarted in what were legitimate aims and objectives? It is not good enough to simply say: ‘Well, they got it wrong. They can go home and we don’t care.’

Mike Symon (Deakin, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise to speak in support of the Education Services for Overseas Students Amendment (Re-registration of Providers and Other Measures) Bill 2009. There are over 547,000 young overseas students in Australia to study at one of our many higher education institutions. They study at our universities, at our vocational colleges and at our English-language schools. There are now some107 public providers and 1,066 private providers servicing the overseas student education industry in the higher education, VET and English-language sectors.

Most people would have seen recent reports in the media exposing a number of institutions and agents that by all accounts appear to have been set up to operate as facilities for international students seeking permanent residency in Australia. Quality of education and results do not seem to be the primary aims of these dodgy agents and institutions, and the student’s interests are placed last in line when profit is the only motive. And it seems that not a month goes by when we do not hear of yet another college closure.

I can only imagine that many international students might feel incredibly daunted when they first arrive in Australia—as many of us do when we go to a country we have never been to before. Not only do they need to concentrate on their forthcoming studies, but they need to find somewhere to live, learn how to navigate the transport system and figure out simple things such as where to buy their food. They may have to find a job to help support themselves and pay college fees. More often than not, they are dealing with a second language. They have to make new friends, build new social support networks and figure out new cultural niceties—let alone having to make sure they are in the right classroom at the right time.

Imagine having that stress compounded by showing up at class and discovering the institution you have enrolled at is not all it advertised to be. We have all heard stories about catering courses in colleges with no kitchens and flight schools with no aeroplanes. Imagine coming to the realisation that you have been duped by the education agent back home, in cahoots with your new school in Australia—a school more interested in taking your money than in offering you the chance to learn new skills.

Like many members of the House, it is my hope that my children will have a holistic experience when they move into higher education—whatever form that education may take. I want them to grow and explore new ideas and new concepts and to build new relationships. I want them to thrive in their new environment. But, most importantly, I want to be sure they are receiving a quality education that is recognised wherever they may go.

It is hard to imagine that the parents of overseas students in Australia do not have the some hopes for their children. While they would be incredibly proud of their child’s achievements and hopeful for what the future might bring, I imagine they might also feel some misgiving. They would want to be sure their child is getting what they signed up for, that the hard-earned money they are using to pay the fees is going to good use and that their child will be safe. I believe that we have an obligation as international citizens and as hosts of these overseas students to ensure that they enjoy the holistic experience that quality higher education brings and that their wellbeing and interests are looked after. We would expect nothing less if our children were studying overseas.

The overseas education sector is our third biggest export, after coal and iron ore, pumping a massive $16.6 billion into our economy in the last year. Growing at a rate above 14 per cent per annum since 2002, this sector is now one of Australia’s great export industries. The overseas education industry is a sector of our economy that remains in good shape despite the global financial crisis. It is absolutely in our economic interests to maintain a strong and viable overseas education sector. If we were to lose the contribution that overseas education makes to our economy, the results would be difficult to deal with.

However, the financial benefits of a strong overseas education industry are not the only benefits. The students we educate help us to build our international relationships and to build new links between nations. They improve our diplomatic networks and our security ties. They open up new opportunities for international business and trade. The Deputy Prime Minister, in her recent opinion piece on this subject in the Sydney Morning Herald, quoted former Monash University Vice-Chancellor Richard Larkins, who pointed out that many senior diplomatic, business and political roles in South-East Asia are filled by graduates of our universities or the parents of those studying here. Indeed, the links and ties we gain from these students are invaluable.

Overseas students make a unique contribution to our society. These young, vibrant people add so much to our multicultural community, giving us the opportunity to gain a greater insight into their heritage and culture. We are richer for that contribution not only in the capital cities but also in the regional towns with nearby universities or VET facilities. In my electorate of Deakin, international students at the Croydon campus of Swinburne University undertake diploma courses in health and human services. However, they are also involved in campus and community life. International students, as part of the Swinburne Student Amenities Association, organise opportunities for students to get to know one another, to learn from each other and to create links with the community. They should be commended for this important work.

And, while I am talking about Swinburne, I would like to mention that the Indian Consul-General in Melbourne, Ms Anita Nayar, attended the recent midyear graduation ceremony of international students. She specifically mentioned the commitment of Swinburne to caring for the wellbeing of students and congratulated them for it. She also reminded students of an old Sanskrit saying: ‘The whole world is one family’. And I think it behoves us to remember that.

For the most part, the education providers that international students enrol at are reputable organisations, like Swinburne, that provide excellent qualifications and look after the welfare of their students. It is unfortunate, however, that this is not always the case. I believe it is imperative that we ensure the strong reputation of the Australian education system overseas is maintained now and well into the future. It is our responsibility to care for the students who arrive to study here and we should highly value the contribution that the international student sector makes to our economy. We also need to ensure the continuing cultural contribution that overseas students make to our communities by encouraging fair and ethical treatment of international students. We need prospective students and their families to know that when they arrive in Australia they will get what they paid for and that they will be treated with respect whilst they are here.

This bill, as the Deputy Prime Minister has already outlined, provides for the re-registration of all institutions currently registered by Commonwealth Register of Institutions and Courses for Overseas Students by 31 December 2010. This will allow the Commonwealth government to ensure that all education providers in the overseas student sector are complying with the regulations set down for them. Importantly, re-registration is intended to restore confidence in the quality of Australia’s international education sector, both here and abroad. Registration of providers not re-registered by the end of 2010 will be cancelled, with the clear message: clean up your act or face closure.

This bill will provide for the publication by each institution of the education agents that represent them and will require providers to comply with regulations concerning their agents. This bill allows for more flexible administration of suspensions of education providers. Members of the House would probably be aware that the Deputy Prime Minister recently held a roundtable with 31 representative international students. They made a number of requests of the government to enhance their safety, wellbeing and education. It is the government’s hope that these discussions will develop a new representative body for overseas students to ensure that their interests are voiced in our community. Our international students should be assured that their voices will be heard by this government.

The communique the students presented to the Deputy Prime Minister in September will be considered in the review of the international student sector currently being conducted by Bruce Baird, the former member for Cook. The government is cracking down on dodgy education providers and the use of disreputable agents that work to recruit students under false pretences. We are working to make sure that international students have a stronger voice in our community. These changes all go towards helping to make sure the Australian overseas education sector remains first class and that our strong reputation overseas is maintained. Deputy Speaker, I commend this bill to the House.

Peter Lindsay (Herbert, Liberal Party, Shadow Parliamentary Secretary for Defence) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I am pleased to be able to speak on the Education Services for Overseas Students Amendment (Re-registration of Providers and Other Measures) Bill 2009 this afternoon. As I move around the world, as we all do, I hear about the high regard in which Australian education institutions are held, and that makes me mighty proud to be an Aussie. Some of the countries that I have visited, countries that would normally turn to perhaps the United Kingdom for their overseas students, have now begun to turn to Australia. That is why it is so important that we have a properly regulated education system and that issues that we have seen in the last year are addressed. This bill will certainly attend to those particular issues. That is why I think there is general support across the parliament, and so there should be, on this particular bill. The amendments that have been foreshadowed are very sensible and very helpful to this bill, the government and the parliament. I hope that they will receive the support of the parliament when they are formally moved by the member for Boothby.

I am very lucky that in my electorate I happen to have the world’s finest tropical university. The member for Jagajaga will certainly agree with me in relation to that because it covers Townsville and Cairns, and the member for Leichhardt will agree with me in relation to the Cairns campus of James Cook University. JCU excels particularly in the marine science area—it leads the world in marine science issues—and therefore attracts a lot of international students. We have Federation Fellows, ReefHQ, the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Authority, the Australian Institute of Marine Science—AIMS—at JCU, and the Marine and Tropical Sciences Research Facility. There is a great body of marine science in Townsville that, in fact, leads the world. Of course, Townsville is the capital city of Northern Australia. It is Australia’s largest tropical city. The only way that Townsville has failed is that it is not on the weather map enough. Cairns is up there. Of course, you would not want to live in Cairns at the moment with its very high unemployment because of its dependence on the tourism industry.

In 2008 JCU had 1,681 international students on campus, with about 400 of those at the Cairns campus. That represented 12½ per cent, or one-eighth, of the on-campus student body, so international students are very significant. I am pleased the member for Leichhardt has joined us, because he and I together can sing the praises of the world’s best tropical university.

Jim Turnour (Leichhardt, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Hear, hear!

Peter Lindsay (Herbert, Liberal Party, Shadow Parliamentary Secretary for Defence) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Member for Leichhardt, I understand our vice-chancellor is in Cairns today, but she has had her passport stamped and, later this afternoon, will be returning to Townsville where she proudly lives.

Jim Turnour (Leichhardt, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr Turnour interjecting

Peter Lindsay (Herbert, Liberal Party, Shadow Parliamentary Secretary for Defence) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Hansard should note that interjection. In 2008 James Cook University had a total of 4,785 international students, if you count the Singapore campus, the Brisbane operation and offshore partnership arrangements. If that is taken into account, international students represent 29 per cent of the university’s student body. The point I am making here is that international students are very important to our local universities and to Australia.

With the recent intake at the Cairns and Townsville campuses of JCU, we have seen students come from 50 different countries. It is extraordinary that 50 countries are providing students to James Cook University. The 12 top countries in order of the number of commencing students are the United States followed by India and then Germany, Norway, Canada, the UK, Japan, Denmark, Papua New Guinea, France and Sweden. Students from right across the world are coming to James Cook University—the most significant tropical university in the world. Also in 2009, JCU was pleased with the increase in the number of international students coming to the university for bachelor and postgraduate degrees. That has a flow-on benefit for two or three years as the students complete their degrees. The point here is that international students are just so important to our universities. According to the International Student Centre at James Cook University, there are currently students from at least 100 nationalities studying through the university. All I can say—and I am sure that the member for Leichhardt will back my comment—is: well done, James Cook University. You are going from strength to strength, and so you should. We appreciate the fine work that you do for education in North Queensland and Australia.

In relation to the bill, delivering education services for overseas students is a vital industry for Australia. The growth of Australia’s international education industry has been significant in the last decade. In 2000 it was Australia’s fifth largest export industry, but by last year it had risen to be our third largest export. I was recently in Mauritius, where the students there are studying through universities and TAFEs in Western Australia. This is an example of students who have given up on the idea of going to Europe for education services and who have come to Australia because we are better. In June 2009, which is not so long ago, there were nearly half a million full-fee paying international students on student visas studying in Australia. That is double the number of students in 2002.

In recent months we have heard terrible stories from a number of students about the operation of some private education institutions. The allegations have included students being forced to pay extra fees on top of the agreed cost and then being threatened with the revocation of their visas should they not comply. As a country, we must address these issues to ensure that international students are not subject to such unfair and harmful treatment and that these sorts of things do not damage Australia’s reputation as a leading provider of higher education. That reputation is at stake. Our positive reputation in this field is at risk of permanent damage if these dishonest and outrageous practices are not stopped. The legislation before the parliament today proposes several changes to address these particular issues. It requires institutions that are currently registered on the Commonwealth Register of Institutions and Courses for Overseas Students to reregister by the end of 2010. This is to ensure that all registered institutions meet the required standards and so help to restore faith in an industry beset by some recent problems and controversy. The bill also mandates that the names of education agents used by registered institutions be published, whether they work within Australia or overseas.

I strongly support moves to better protect international students coming to study in Australia. The coalition strongly supports those moves. I believe that the government also strongly supports those moves because it has put this bill up for debate and consideration by the parliament this afternoon. However, we believe that because the bill does not go far enough it could still leave overseas students vulnerable. It is not enough to pay lip-service to a problem. The parliament must propose practical solutions to ensure that education services for overseas students are of the highest quality. That is why we have proposed an amendment, for which we have given notice. The amendment is designed to ensure that the changes made to the regulation of the industry will be as effective as possible and provide the best possible protection for overseas students. It is clear that there are problems in the system and that the solution must be to make certain that the industry is as transparent and accountable as possible.

I ask the government to favourably consider the amendment that has been put forward and, in that way, we can work together as a team and get a better outcome for our overseas export of education services. I strongly urge the government to support the coalition’s amendment. This is an important bill but one that needs further clarification to make sure that we get the best outcome for all concerned.

Jim Turnour (Leichhardt, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise today to support the Education Services for Overseas Students Amendment (Re-registration of Providers and Other Measures) Bill 2009. This piece of legislation is another element of the Rudd government’s commitment to revolutionise education in Australia. The Rudd government is reforming education at all levels. We are improving early childhood education and child-care services, and the measures for this sector include universal access to early childhood education, establishing a new national quality standard and removing TAFE fees for certain child-care courses to encourage further training by those working in the sector and new people into the sector. We are also investing in our primary and secondary schools by building libraries, multipurpose halls and science and language centres. We are ensuring that every Australian school student has access to computer facilities, particularly those who are attending high school. We are supporting the vocational education and training sector through major investments in infrastructure at our TAFEs and assisting our apprentices and trainees by establishing trade training centres across the country. We are making a significant investment through that program in high schools in my electorate, particularly in the construction of a marine skills training centre.

We continue to support our universities, although the Liberals recently voted down the government’s Higher Education Legislation Amendment (Student Services and Amenities) Bill 2009, which leaves universities with a big funding whole and will mean the demise of important university services such as child care, counselling, health, sport and fitness services. The member for Herbert was speaking highly of James Cook University, as I do. I know that James Cook University is very disappointed by the way the opposition dealt with that legislation. They would certainly like to see those measures passed so that students can get the services they need. I believe international students would benefit from those services as well.

We are a lucky country. We are fortunate that our children can access a good education. A strong education sector has been established in Australia. It is a very important and significant contributor to the nation’s economy. That is why so many students from throughout the world travel to Australia to study—from high school students doing an exchange to university students who spend three or more years and considerable money in our country just so that they can obtain a tertiary qualification from an Australian institution. The education sector is important nationally but also to local communities like mine in Cairns, Tropical North Queensland. A study by Cummings Economics in 2004 found the sector contributed more than $50 million to the local economy and it would have grown significantly since then.

Unemployment in the far north sadly has reached 13.8 per cent, according to the latest ABS statistics, with the tourism and construction industries being hard hit by the global recession. Industries such as the education sector provide another branch of the Cairns economy. It is a sector we need to grow and strengthen into the future, in an effort to diversify our economy and to move away from the boom-bust cycle which we often experience because of our over-reliance on tourism and a speculative construction industry. As Study Cairns—the peak education cluster organisation representing schools, the vocational education and training sector and James Cook University—says, in promoting the region, ‘Come, study in paradise.’ That is certainly the message I am pushing here in Canberra with the Deputy Prime Minister and others as they look to promote Australian education overseas.

This legislation is important in ensuring the we maintain our reputation and standing as a place to get a quality education, for those from overseas who come to this country to study. The education services  for overseas students amendments are an important part of the government’s move to improve the quality and reputation of education in Australia. The bill will amend the Education Services for Overseas Students Act 2000. This act establishes a regulatory regime for the provision of international education and training services to protect the interests of overseas students through the establishment of minimum standards and providing tuition and financial assurances. It also complements Australia’s migration laws by ensuring providers collect and report information relevant to the administration of the law relating to student visas.

The education sector continues to grow in Australia. In 2008, the international education industry was valued at $15.5 billion. Nearly half a million students come to Australia to study every year, according to Australian Education International. As at June 2009, there were 467,407 enrolments by full-time international students in Australia on a student visa, compared with 204,401 in June 2002. Yet, with the many economic and social advantages and opportunities which this continued growth brings to Australia, there are a few bad apples within the industry that are threatening its future. This bill is about strengthening the framework that protects Australia’s reputation for delivering quality education services.

The government is introducing this legislation in response to growing concern about cases where international students are being taken advantage of. There is an increasing number of reports that some education agents are acting unscrupulously. We have seen the reports of the Indian students in places like Melbourne. Those reports are unfortunate. We need to take steps to ensure that those problems are resolved so that we maintain our quality education sector and the reputation which goes with it.

When over 70 per cent of international students studying in Australia have been placed by an agent, there is a clear need for government to ensure that the appropriate checks and balances for education agents are in place, particularly as the international education industry in Australia continues to grow at such a strong rate. To take no action would be irresponsible. It is important to note that the majority of operators are doing the right thing. They are providing a quality program, support and advice to their students and I am sure will continue to do so well into the future. It is the minority who are not acting in the best interests of students and therefore threaten the future of Australia’s education industry. Whether it be questionable education standards, charging exorbitant fees or immigration rorting—training colleges set up primarily for international students seeking permanent residency through the skilled migration program, a purely profit driven motivation—this is the underbelly of education in Australia. It must be stopped and the shonky operators must be kicked out. That is why we are committed to amendments to the Education Services for Overseas Students Act which will tighten the existing framework, including requiring the reregistration, by 31 December 2010, of all institutions currently on the Commonwealth Register of Institutions and Courses for Overseas Students to deliver courses of education and training to international students. Should providers fail to reregister by this date, their registration will be cancelled.

We will be going through this reregistration process, ensuring that people are meeting their obligation to international students and are meeting their obligations as quality education providers in this country. We will be introducing two new registration criteria for education providers, which require that the state and territory registration authorities must be satisfied that the provider’s principal purpose is the provision of education and that the provider has demonstrated a capacity to provide education of a satisfactory standard.

These new registration requirements aim to strengthen the education credentials of new providers and existing providers. For Australia to continue to build the international education sector, we need assurances that our visitors, who are spending considerable time, effort and money to study here, are receiving a quality product and experience from their chosen educational institution. An eductor’s principal purpose should be just that—to educate. These requirements aim to ensure that only legitimate, genuine operators are registered to provide education to overseas students. We are requiring registered education providers to publish the names of the education agents who represent them and promote their education services and comply with any regulations relating to them.

These requirements are about increasing the accountability and transparency of international education and training providers. They give better assurance and confidence to students that the institutions they attend, the qualifications they receive at the end of their study and the advice and support they receive along the way are valuable, worth while and of high quality. These requirements are about reducing the risk to individual students but also to the industry’s reputation as a whole.

Australia is a popular destination for international students. Our universities, TAFEs and colleges rate very well internationally. Australia has established an excellent reputation globally for education and, coupled with its safe, relaxed environment and incredible natural wonders, there is no better place to study. I represent the electorate of Leichhardt up in tropical North Queensland. My electorate extends from Cairns and Port Douglas to the Daintree and Cooktown and right up to Cape York and the Torres Strait. It really is the best part of Australia, if not the world, and that is why millions of tourists visit our region every year. Cairns is also fortunate enough to be home to a great university in James Cook University and have a campus locally. James Cook University is officially ranked in the top five per cent of world universities, of which there are about 10,000, based on assessments in 2008 by two of the world’s leading university ranking systems. I know the university is highly regarded by students here and abroad, and researchers are attracted to the vision of an institution that strives to be one of the world’s leading research universities in the tropics. I know that Professor Sandra Harding, the vice-chancellor, is further developing and building upon that experience and knowledge to improve on its already world-class status in its tropical expertise. JCU is a critical driver of our region’s economy. According to the James Cook University Economic Impact Report 2008, JCU’s value to the Cairns economy is $86 million, and for every $1 million of expenditure the university creates $1.18 million for the Cairns economy.

The Rudd Government and JCU have partnered to deliver a new dental school—a $50 million investment I campaigned hard for in the lead-up to the last election and which is testament to the great work and great staff of this top quality campus. I was there recently opening some temporary training facilities and saw that students have started training there this year. The site has been cleared for the new building to be constructed and it will be completed towards the end of next year.

The establishment of the Cairns Institute is another exciting development taking shape at the Cairns campus with the support of the federal government. This international institute will provide advanced studies in the social sciences and humanities in the tropics—yet another facet in the university’s ambition to achieve excellence through higher education learning and research, particularly with a tropical focus. Cairns is a First World city in a First World country and we have a great opportunity to educate the world, particularly as it relates to tropical expertise. I am proud to be part of a government that is committed to supporting this quality local university with a first-class international reputation.

We have a world-class TAFE facility, private and community based vocational education and training organisations and English language schools. The Rudd government has just committed $12 million as part of its economic stimulus plan to upgrade the health and sustainable building precinct, library and car park at the Tropical North Queensland Institute of TAFE, and more than half a million dollars to build a community education and training facility with Skill360, the region’s peak group training organisation. We have stand-alone training centres like our Aviation Skills Centre and the soon-to-be constructed marine skills training centre. Thanks to a $2 million commitment from the government as part of our trades training package, we are building that in partnership with the Queensland government. We have fantastic state schools, catholic and non-government educational facilities in Cairns. In 2005, Cairns State High School, the region’s oldest high school, successfully completed the process for international accreditation through the Council of International Schools in partnership with the Council of Internationally Accredited Schools (Australia).

With quality educational institutions like these, and with the Great Barrier Reef, World Heritage listed rainforests and the outback all at our doorstep, it is no wonder that international education is also a steady and growing sector in our regional economy. Study Cairns is the region’s peak body bringing the different education providers in the region together with accommodation houses and tourism operators. Study Cairns members work together to promote Cairns internationally as an education destination and lobby nationally to improve local facilities and opportunities for all students within the region. The Study Cairns network is dedicated to improving the quality of services offered.

International students in Cairns come from Japan, China, Papua New Guinea, Europe, Hong Kong, Brazil and Korea, to name a few. The Cummings report in 2004 valued the industry at more than $50 million to the region and it would have grown considerably since then. I congratulate Susan Rees, the newly elected President of Study Cairns, for the leadership she has shown and look forward to partnering her and continuing to develop this important sector of our local economy. There is obviously a need to update the Cummings economic report done in 2004 so we can highlight further the real benefits of studying in Cairns and the value it brings to our local economy.

As I said earlier, unemployment in Cairns has hit 13.8 per cent and there is a desperate need for the region’s economy to diversify. Our world-class educational facilities including JCU, TAFE, marine and aviation skills centres, English language and high schools provide a great opportunity for Cairns to become an education hub not only for Queensland and Australia but for the Asia Pacific region and the rest of the world. We need, though, to protect the reputations of these institutions and the nation as an education provider. This legislation is about ensuring the quality reputation that education institutions have worked hard to establish is protected and ensuring the future remains bright for these very important contributors to education in this country and overseas and to our local economy. Cairns has an enormous amount of potential to further develop as an ‘education hub’, which is why it is critically important that the screws are tightened and unsavoury operators are weeded out and got rid of. It does not matter whether they are in Melbourne, Sydney, Canberra or Cairns, we need to get them out and make sure we strengthen this industry going forward.

I strongly support the proposed amendments to the Education Services for Overseas Students Act. Australia has some of the best and brightest educators. We want to continue to attract talented students from around the world to our great institutions. It is paramount that we do what we can to protect the reputation of a hugely important export industry for Australia and for my home town of Cairns in tropical North Queensland.

Judi Moylan (Pearce, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

It is a privilege to be able to talk in this place to the Education Services for Overseas Students Amendment (Re-registration of Providers and Other Measures) Bill 2009. The treatment of overseas students by Australian education providers has indeed been the subject of intense interest in recent times—probably for all the wrong reasons, unfortunately—and the collapse of a number of private colleges has focused attention on the small minority of unscrupulous providers who risk Australia’s reputation as a world-class education destination. Australia’s education industry is a crucial exporter, bringing $15.4 billion into the country last year, and there has been a staggering growth in overseas demand for education services in Australia. Accordingly, there has also been growth in the number of education providers offering places to overseas students. With such immense growth comes the very real risk of crooked providers only interested in turning a profit in the marketplace, and this is what we have seen in recent times with reports from students showing alarming breaches of the system that is designed to protect them.

What is quite clear is that, while the vast majority of providers are doing the right thing by their students, there are certainly some out there who threaten not only the reputation of one of Australia’s greatest exports but also, and more importantly, the aspirations of many of their students. As anyone in business would tell you, your reputation is your greatest asset—and for Australia’s education industry this is particularly true. It is unfortunate that the dishonest behaviour of some providers has the capacity to undermine the sector as a whole. It threatens to devastate the reputation of Australia as a first-rate destination for overseas students. Not for one minute would I want to portray this in terms of the financial benefits to Australia, because I think there are benefits well beyond the financial ones in making sure that our education system is rigorously protected and that the students entering it are rigorously protected so that they get the kind of education that they want.

This really takes me back to the Colombo Plan, a plan that was well before my time in this place. I want to touch on aspects of that because I think it would help us to recognise that the benefits of overseas students coming to Australia go well beyond financial considerations and indeed well beyond someone just getting a degree. The Colombo Plan has occupied a very prominent place in Australia’s history and Australia’s relationship with Asia. It is best remembered for sponsoring thousands of Asian students to study or train in Australian tertiary institutions. It reached into almost every aspect of foreign policy, from strategic planning and diplomatic initiatives to economic and cultural engagement. It was very much grounded in the faith that improved living standards would foster political stability. You have to understand that this was in the context of post World War II and the rise of communism throughout the Asian region. The foreign minister at the time, Percy Spender, felt that this would be a force for diplomatic aid and so the Colombo Plan was born. It offered a prism through which to examine the changing nature of Australia’s relationship with Asia, the United Kingdom and the United States. Documents in relation to the program reveal Australia’s hope of using the aid program to involve the United States in regional affairs and cultivate diplomatic and commercial relations, so it had many benefits.

While we are not here to talk about the Colombo Plan specifically today, what I want to highlight from the lessons learned from the Colombo Plan is the very important part that having students from other countries in this country gaining an education can play in fostering a greater understanding between cultures and religions and breaking down many of the barriers and prejudices that can sometimes exist through lack of contact. Dr Daniel Oakman has examined in quite close detail the Colombo Plan. I believe his work will be published in a book, presumably soon to be released if it has not already been. A report on his work says:

He explains that most Australians think the Colombo Plan was only an education program under which Asian students came to Australia on scholarships. That was an important part of the plan and it had a profound effect on Australia, but it did involve a lot of other activities.

Between 1950 and the 1980s about 20,000 Colombo Plan students came to Australia.

… during the 1950s privately funded Asian students outnumbered Colombo Plan students by about five to one,’ Oakman says.

Maybe it could be argued the Colombo Plan was the forerunner to students from Asia feeling comfortable about coming into Australia, although I am not sure about that; but Dr Oakman says:

‘The impact of the Colombo Plan was greatly magnified because when any Australian saw an Asian student they assumed that the student was funded under the Colombo Plan … The Colombo Plan had a momentum that the Government had not banked on. Many of the privately funded students came because of word-of-mouth and good things that they had heard from earlier Colombo Plan students. The returning Colombo Plan students acted as a sort of advertisement that Australia was a good place to come to for education. It was cheaper for them to come here than to go to the United Kingdom or America—

the United States—

and Australian education institutions had a good reputation.’

These are the kinds of reports that we would like our overseas students to be going back with today. Perhaps it might be instructive for those engaged in providing education to overseas students today to examine some of the elements of the Colombo Plan and its success. I will go on to quote more from a report about him:

Oakman says those students in Australia turned on their head the stereotypical assumptions upon which the Colombo Plan had been based.

‘The Asians who were coming to Australia did not conform to that 1950s stereotypical view that they—

Australians—

previously had of Asians,’ he said. ‘The students could speak acceptable English. They came from middle-class backgrounds. Eventually their academic performance exceeded that of Australians. This would have been quite confronting. These were not rabid communists, poor or disease-ridden Asian hordes. In fact they were perfect examples of assimilation because they came into Australia with very few problems of integrating into an Australian society.

I commend Dr Oakman’s paper because it makes very interesting reading and gives pause for reflection on the importance of us engaging and breaking down cultural and religious barriers and gaining greater acceptance. This, of course, goes both ways.

By failing to do the right thing, those few educational institutions who are not giving value for money and not looking after the interests of the students they are attracting from overseas are damaging not just Australia’s capacity to earn a considerable income from the export of education and the future employment opportunities of those young people who come seeking an education; they are doing incredible untold damage to what can be a fantastic opportunity to engage at a cultural level and to bring about more peaceful and harmonious relationships within our communities and those communities that students originate from.

Dr Oakman’s paper also talks quite a bit about how the Colombo plan allowed the Australian officials to get a better grip on how an aid program ought to be structured in the Asian region—because it was a very short-term program. It was failing and in some cases was doing more harm than good. The paper concludes:

On the upside, the Colombo Plan was a great diplomatic icebreaker. One of the few contacts Australia had with some Asian countries was through the Colombo Plan. So there was a connection for diplomats to work with. It was a constant feature of their conversation and diplomacy. It would enhance the level of engagement that was going on. And that built relationships and helped negotiate conflicts.

It is worth driving home to those providers of education who are not doing the right thing their obligations to their country and their obligations to work more rigorously to ensure a good outcome and a good experience for overseas students in this country.

The bill before the House is aimed at protecting Australia’s education reputation. While this is most certainly a worthy intent, there are still a number of ways in which it may be improved. The key aspect of the bill concerns the re-regulation of providers on the Commonwealth Register of Institutions and Courses for Overseas Students. In order to be re-registered, providers will need to be able to demonstrate that their principal purpose is to provide education, rather than merely make a profit, and that they have the capacity to provide education at a satisfactory standard. These are very important aims and they are very supportable, but it is important to note at this stage that the monitoring of overseas student services is a jurisdiction shared by states and territories and the Commonwealth. The states and territories act as quality control and will be responsible for interpreting and, indeed, applying the requirements. It is hoped but not guaranteed that the requirements will be uniformly defined and applied by the various state and territory authorities. It is worth looking at ways to strengthen that, for all the reasons I have just outlined to the House.

Reading through a number of the submissions to the inquiry by the Senate Education, Employment and Workplace Relations Legislation Committee, it is clear that a number of providers are concerned by the lack of a risk-management approach to the re-registration. All education providers to overseas students will need to undertake this re-registration process, regardless of their risk strategy. It is also clear from these submissions that there is a widespread belief that current issues are due predominantly to enforcement—or perhaps the lack of it. The question must be asked: if a universal re-registration process is carried out with no risk management involved, will the authorities have the capacity to carry out this new workload in addition to the already considerable enforcement duties?

The Australian Council for Private Education and Training in its submission to the Senate committee noted:

Appropriate risk management principles need to be incorporated into the Bill and its associated regulations and implementation to ensure that the operation of those institutions with a history of regulatory compliance are not disrupted or disadvantaged by additional regulatory and administrative burden.

This is an important point. We see it in many pieces of legislation, particularly in relation to business. While the majority of businesses, including these education providers, act decently and provide a very high standard of services, unfortunately we have to put in place regulation to deal with those who seek to damage Australia’s reputation by running services that are not in the best interests of students. But we need to be very careful to balance the tension here between an appropriate level of regulation and overburdening those organisations and institutions that demonstrate a track record of doing the right thing. It is thoroughly sensible that the authorities implement a risk-management approach to the re-registration process so that limited resources can best be directed to providers who pose the highest risk, while, as I said, the many respectable providers are not unnecessarily hampered with onerous registration processes. This is necessary to ensure that the authorities can effectively enforce the Education Services for Overseas Students Act and unscrupulous providers are weeded out of the industry as soon as possible. That is definitely a very high priority.

Another key aspect of this bill is the requirement that providers make public the education agents that they use. Education agents are fundamentally important in the international marketing of providers. They wield a massive influence in arranging education for foreign students. But this significant power is open for abuse. Education agents are the face of Australia’s education industry. A false claim by one agent chips away at Australia’s leading reputation and in many instances also places the student under immense emotional and financial strain. Reports from students unfortunately indicate that false claims have frequently been made by some agents, who, presumably working under commission, lure students to Australian providers by misrepresenting the reality.

The Australian Federation of International Students has commented:

Although agents are not (legally) representatives of Australia, however, to international students and their parents, agents are the representative of Australia.

One can understand why that might be so. The federation continues:

The reputation of Australia, is therefore strongly linked to the practices of education agents.

Where education agents are such an integral component of Australia’s education industry and where there have been so many stories of agents abusing this power, more is needed to fix this urgent issue. We need to actively ensure that only the most up-to-date, accurate information is being distributed by agents and that people who do make misleading statements to would-be students are punished.

The only way that we can ensure education agents are dispersing accurate information is to make sure that the agents themselves are trained. I believe that such training should cover an agent’s responsibility under the states’ fair trading legislation and the Trade Practices Act, especially with regard to misleading and deceptive conduct.

It is regrettable that we have witnessed the consequences of unscrupulous education providers and agents and that it has culminated in the closure of a string of private colleges. For those unfortunate students enrolled in these colleges, the measures in this bill will be of little assistance. And it seems that the key safeguard in place for students, the Education Services for Overseas Students Assurance Fund, is in a dire situation. The Australian newspaper reported back in July of this year that the fund’s annual report predicts ‘future bad claims totalling $5.4 million’.

Following the re-registration process, it is entirely foreseeable and indeed desirable that a number of education providers will be forced to close down. For the students enrolled in these institutions, it is unclear if the fund designed to protect their interests will be able to do so. We all hope that the industry will have the capacity to absorb the displaced students efficiently in the interests of the students, the viability of the fund and, may I add, in the interests of Australia’s long-term future as an outstanding education provider. In light of the fund’s present difficulties, it is highly desirable that we seek to introduce new measures to increase transparency and accountability of the fund. The parliament should be informed where a claim is made on the fund.

I, like so many others, have been deeply disappointed by the stories emerging about crooked providers and agents. It is important, though, to not let this minority tarnish the achievements of an industry that continues to serve Australia well in the main. We must act decisively to protect Australia’s reputation in this regard, as we would a threat to any other major export industry.

The intent behind this bill is to do just that. However, considering what is at stake, these measures in some way fall short of the necessary mark and could be strengthened. In an industry where state and territory authorities are already stretched to the extent that enforcement is routinely being compromised, we should seek to have a risk-management approach so that scarce resources are best targeted to where they are needed the most.

In an industry where a small number of agents acting without honesty or integrity threaten our global reputation, we should clearly seek to ensure that only those who are equipped with the right knowledge, and who are aware of the consequences of misleading behaviour, act as agents for our education industry.

Brett Raguse (Forde, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise to speak on the Education Services for Overseas Students Amendment (Re-registration of Providers and Other Measures) Bill 2009. I acknowledge not only the contribution of the previous speaker, the member for Pearce, in the discussion of the Colombo Plan but also the member for Boothby, who also mentioned the Colombo Plan. It is something I will talk about a little bit later in my presentation. The interesting thing of course is that while it is a significant program, it was not all beer and skittles in terms of some of the issues and concerns that came out of that plan, which were not unlike some of the issues we are dealing with through this legislation.

Australia’s quality education services are well recognised and respected internationally. As a result, the growing education export sector is now worth a substantial $15 billion a year. As in any new area of rapid growth, some less scrupulous operators have appeared in the industry. No doubt members here in the House have seen publicity surrounding allegations against private college operators. Recently, the AAP published reports about alleged bad practices of private college operators. In the article, Overseas Students’ Support Network Australia’s Executive Director, Robert Palmer, reported that he had received over 1,500 serious complaints from students since the start of the year. Clearly, this is a situation of concern—concern for the wellbeing of students visiting Australia and concern for the international reputation of Australia as a quality education service provider. It is in this context that I speak on the bill that seeks to strengthen and restore confidence in education services for overseas students.

The bill seeks amendments to the Education Services for Overseas Students Act 2000. These amendments increase the accountability of international education and training service providers under the National Code of Practice for Registration Authorities and Providers of Education and Training to Overseas Students 2007. The registration process for Commonwealth Register of Institutions and Courses for Overseas Students is proposed to be strengthened by two new registration criteria. These new criteria involve demonstrating a genuine purpose and capacity to provide quality education services. A provider must have a principal purpose of providing education to have a genuine purpose. To restore confidence and ensure that these criteria are followed, all institutions will have to register by the end of 2010. Institutions that fail to reregister would have their registration cancelled.

The bill also contains a series of minor but important amendments. Providers will be required to publish the names of any education agents that represent them. A list of agents will be required to be published on websites and in any other manner prescribed by regulation. Enhancements are proposed for managing a provider’s registration, for a provider’s ability to provide educational services and for default situations. This includes the ability of the minister to impose conditions on a provider’s registration. The definition of a suitable alternative course will be clarified. This will help prevent students from being placed in courses that substantially differ from their anticipated course. The financial and regulatory burden will be lessened for providers that legitimately seek changes to their business structures.

In her second reading speech, the Minister for Education, Employment and Workplace Relations noted the issue of recent racial violence against international students in Melbourne. While isolated, these attacks have inevitably dented our reputation overseas. I join with the minister in condemning these attacks. Australia remains a safe and welcoming country and the brutal actions of a few are not supported by the majority of Australians. It does have ramifications for our international reputation. Overseas students not only provide a tangible economic benefit to Australia but allow a valuable cultural dialogue. We all have the potential to gain from the positive exchange of ideas and cultures.

I mentioned the contribution by the member for Pearce on the Colombo plan. In fact, I have made a number of trips to do with the education sector—and I will talk about those in depth a little bit more later. I met one time with representatives from the Malaysian government and even had a one-off meeting with then Prime Minister Mahathir. He and his colleagues were beneficiaries of the Colombo plan. It was interesting because their experience of and exposure to some of the attitudes in Australia in the 1950s put in his mind—and this is something that he has reflected on at different times—an understanding of some of the racial hatred that existed at that period of time. That is going back a long time and attitudes in Australia have changed significantly. But the issue here, of course, is that here is a man who went on to become a very well-known and influential leader in the modern world. His views and concerns about Western globalisation were reflected at times in his dealings with Australia. He had concerns about our culture going back to his own experiences of some of the racial taunts back in the 1950s.

It is of concern that even small incidents that occur can have effects well into the future on our reputation in terms of people who study in this country, have access to this country or involvement in our culture. It is important that the legacy is a good legacy for us into the future. Mahathir was Prime Minister of Malaysia for 22 years. We all well know the clashes that we had at the political level during that period of time. All things being equal, the maturity of the relationship with Malaysia these days is very good. But it is clear that personal experience can have a bearing on people’s understanding of a country.

The minister also noted in her second reading speech the broader context of the Baird review of the Educational Services for Overseas Students Act 2000 and I will look forward to seeing the outcomes of this important review into this large and growing industry. It is an industry that has a significant affect on my electorate of Forde. The member for Moreton spoke earlier about Griffith University. I also have a campus of Griffith University in my electorate, the Logan campus at Meadowbrook. It is situated on the border of the Forde and Rankin electorates. It has a large draw of students from our areas, understandably. But their involvement with international students is well renowned. The international students attracted to the Logan campus inject large amounts of dollars into our local business and many students live nearby in private rental accommodation. So one of the aspects of international education is how it supports the local community, because these students become consumers while they are living in our country.

The Logan campus is located close to the Loganlea train station, the Pacific Motorway and the Logan Hospital. It caters for over 2,500 students, with a focus on community health and education. Courses are offered in areas including the arts, business, engineering, information technology, the environment, law, music and science. All of those areas are well revered and sought after by our international cohort of students.

Having a range of students from many different countries engaged in many different areas of study, the Griffith University, as part of their community health program, has embarked—with the aid of a number of their international students—on a number of cultural extension activities. I recently attended what they called the Hip Hop for Health, or the Hype Event, in August. This event brought a whole range of hip hop dancers together. It was a cultural exchange that also engaged 15 local high schools. It not only promoted health and fitness but the cultural exchange that goes with an event like this.

Dr Neil Harris of the Griffith University School of Public Health explained the unusual approach this way: ‘Hip hop as a particular dance style appeals to youth. Dance is often seen as a great recreational activity, yet it can also be a fun way to do intensive physical activity and has long-term health benefits.’ The event featured over a hundred dancers. While unusual, it was enjoyable and successful and an example of the kind of cultural exchange that comes out of the involvement of international students.

Further to that, I introduced into my electorate more activities for our youth and some of the students, including international students from some of the high schools. We put together a lecture series for students of the electorate, including a number of international students from Hills International and the Canterbury College at Waterford, who are doing very well in attracting international students to our local schools. As a federal member, I seek ways like this to engage further with our youth in the education sector and promote international studies.

We had one of these lectures last week and I would like to briefly mention those young people who contributed on the theme ‘My life, my time.’ The 10 finalists who came out of that particular event all received a reasonable amount of funds to go towards their further studies. These students were: Daisy Watson, from Rivermount College; Adam Tapsall, Ann-Marie Coleman and Madeleine Coonan from Canterbury College; Rebecca Payne, Mary Faucett and Pariya Singhanatnitirak from Beenleigh State High School; and Maddy Dale, Charlotte Piesse and Chantel Graveling from Tamborine Mountain State High School. All these students worked very hard in their own school environment but also took on the opportunity to enhance their understanding of their own life and time but also their culture exchanges. One of those students was a Thai student and she talked about her experiences in Australia.

With the concerns of the industry and the regulation that we are proposing through this legislation, it is interesting that, while governments have to legislate and regulate from time to time, quite often it is about self-improvement in the industry. To some degree these organisations need to have a level of self-regulation. After a series of events and the much publicised need to change and amend legislation I had a visit from, and a meeting with, a number of representatives from different organisations. More importantly, I had a visit from a Brisbane based organisation which is a subsidiary of the University of Queensland—International Education Services, better known as IES. Mr Gerry van Balveren and the director of the organisation, Chris Evason, met with me specifically to speak about this legislation, the reviews and their concerns about what had occurred.

Of course, being parochial and being in Queensland they suggested that these events occurred elsewhere in the country and that Queensland has a very good record. That may be true but the reality is that we cannot rest on our laurels in Queensland and expect that these concerns will never arise on our doorstep. And the reality is that these amendments are certainly all about ensuring that we get continuity across the services.

One of the interesting aspects of IES—it is an organisation that was formed in 1997—is that it is a not-for-profit organisation that provides the University of Queensland Foundation Year, the UQFY, with over 550 international students from over 30 countries. So it is has a great track record and is working very hard in the industry. To a large degree their activities are not well known to the wider educational community but that is simply because they are in there doing the job. It is a very well organised organisation. They said to me that they utilise over 101 agencies across 47 countries to source international students. All agents sign binding agreements and they take responsibility for these agents.

IES also provides internet based training and workshops for professionals in the industry through the Professional International Education Resources or PIER. It is very interesting to look at the resources and understand that PIER have over 11,000 subscribers to their particular system, which is a way of improving the understanding of those who are providing education services to internationals. The particular course, the Education Agent Training Course—the EATC—is a program that they run specifically to deal with some of the issues that are also dealt with in our legislation, regulation and the amendments that we are talking about today. The course specifically deals with some of these issues in a form of training. It is an irony that in the education environment it is so important that educators and those who administer education understand the processes and the traps.

It is interesting to note that as demand for international students grows, more and more people will enter this area and there will be a need for people who have a good understanding and who are well informed in terms of education and the design of education programs. They deal not only with the required bureaucratic response to international students and the way through that maze, but also the cultural requirements that go right across all areas of these students’ engagement. The IES bases this education online. It is a program that people can sign up to. Through the discussion I had with the IES I found that the results that they have had and the quality of education and services that they provide for the international students are well proven.

I have had quite a lot of experience in international programs in this country as a former educator and a director of an educator facility. My work here in Australia and also in a number of countries in South-East Asia some years ago was about developing a pipeline for international students to ensure that we had the right connectivity and to ensure that we had processes that would prevent occurrences like those we have seen recently with this outbreak of violence. It was to inform those who were providing the services in their own country and to provide them with a way of linking in with and forming the pipeline to the services that we can provide in this country. We know, through some of the problems and concerns that have arisen with that so-called violence, that some operators were less informed about their responsibilities when providing education to international students.

My understanding arises from my role back in the late nineties and early two thousands, when we were talking about new media—we have come to know that as multimedia—and the programs we were linking here in Australia with other countries and the South-East Asian countries. It was important then to make linkages that gave the students opportunities to enhance their own local understanding and credentialing and gave countries, like Malaysia, who were very keen on growing their educational base, the opportunity to link with Australian programs—university programs and some of the vocational educational and training programs. At that time, Malaysia, like many South-East Asian countries had programs they called the ‘two plus two’ or the ‘three plus one’. Essentially, the local training that was provided in their own universities was then topped up by study in other countries. Sometimes that occurred in the UK but at that time more and more people were travelling to Australia. Through the involvement that I had at that time it was clear to me that the linkages created a better pipeline to the demand for Australian credentials.

It is so important, as we have said through these amendments, that we ensure that the quality of education—and the perception of the quality of education—is maintained. The international student market is immense. We know that. Students generally travel to Australia for study on the basis that they understand, firstly, that the educational quality is there and that they are safe. That goes also for our international tourist traffic. So whether we are talking about education services, business tourism or education tourism, the students who come to Australia from overseas for cultural immersion come here because the country is safe. That is why it has caused us so much concern. While we know our educational products are sound, students will be very concerned. Their parents put together a large amount of money and funds to send their children to a country that can provide them with education in a safe environment. As we know, we would have the same concerns if we thought sending our own students off to school would mean that they were confronted by certain dangers. We could put ourselves into that context.

Students travel from other countries to a very different culture—a Western culture—and they can immerse themselves into the Australian culture. We want those people going back to their own countries with a positive experience. I gave the example of Prime Minister Mahathir and his experiences in the 1950s, and why he had a certain view.

Harry Jenkins (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Order! It being 2 pm the debate is interrupted in accordance with standing order 97. The debate may be resumed at a later hour. The member will have leave to continue speaking when the debate is resumed.