Andrew Giles (Scullin, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Constituents in the electorate of Scullin are deeply concerned about the impact of savage budget cuts to higher education and even more so about the iniquitous proposals to reform higher education that this government has put forward. I am also keen to inform myself, as are my Labor colleagues, of the breadth of the impact of these changes to higher education and what they will mean for Australia's future.

Earlier this month, as part of Labor's Ed-U-Action campaign, I visited Federation University's SMB and Mt Helen campuses as well as the University of Melbourne's Parkville campus. I was joined by my colleagues the member for Ballarat, the member for Lalor, the member for Griffith and the member for Kingston.

At Federation University, staff we spoke to were concerned about the impact of radical cuts and the effective transition of Federation University from being a research institution to a teaching-only institution and the consequential preclusion from meaningful funding and career opportunities that this would entail. They were keen to emphasise the wonderful cross-institutional collaborations they engaged in with other regional universities across the country and were quick to highlight the disadvantaged demographic the university engages and what this would mean for our society if this group were to be excluded or discouraged from studying and the attendant life opportunities this entails because of high fees and levels of debt or interest.

The students I spoke with were genuinely concerned about what these massive levels of debt would mean for them in terms of their ability to afford a home and start out in life. They were consistently of the view that many people would think that university was simply not worth the cost. When I consider the dramatically increased rate of participation under Labor, this is a tragedy.

At the University of Melbourne, staff expressed similar views. They were concerned about the commodification of education and what this meant for them as professional researchers and educators. They expressed alarm at the impact these changes would have on people from lower socioeconomic backgrounds as well as people entering university later in life. Students here, like those around the country, were viscerally opposed to increasing the amount of debt that they and future students would have to pay.

I was impressed at the level of engagement at these campuses. Contrary to what the Minister for Education has said, this is not about self-interest. Everyone I spoke with expressed concern about our society more generally and what this would mean for the 'fair go' as we know it.

I also visited the Murdoch institute in the heart of Melbourne's world-class Parkville precinct and was struck by the experience—the wonderful and important research that is being done. I asked myself, 'What is at stake for this?' I received an email from a constituent who works at a facility there. He said, 'In the future, I hope to pursue a PhD in immunology. These cuts in effect would stop me from being the best that I could be—not for myself but for Australia.' He speaks powerfully to the consequences of this government's radical agenda—consequences for him and consequences for our country. I say to him: Labor will continue to oppose this government's extreme measures, because we believe in a fair and inclusive society, because we believe a person's talent and hard work—not their bank balance—should determine if they study at university. A degree should not be debt sentence.