Tanya Plibersek (Sydney, Australian Labor Party, Deputy Leader of the Opposition) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I move:

That this House:

(1) notes that:

(a) in the coming weeks, more than one million Australians will resume their university studies for the 2017 academic year;

(b) the Government's failure to release its plans for university funding and fees is creating uncertainty for students planning to commence their studies in 2018 and beyond;

(c) Australian students already pay some of the highest university fees in the OECD;

(d) increasing fees will leave young Australians with significant debt burdens; and

(e) paying off significant debt puts extra pressure on young Australians at critical times in their lives, like when they are saving for a house or considering starting a family; and

(2) calls on the Government to:

(a) end the uncertainty facing students and their parents and finally make it clear, after nine months of inaction, what its plans are for higher education funding and fees from 2018;

(b) rule out significant fee increases;

(c) abandon its 20 per cent cut to university grants;

(d) reverse its short-sighted cuts to the Higher Education Participation and Partnerships Program; and

(e) confirm that it will prevent the Americanisation of our university system through higher fees and higher student debt.

Over the past few weeks more than one million university students are going to university for the first time or going back for a second or third academic year, and it is a very exciting time but also quite a nerve-wracking time for students and their families, particularly for those students attending university for the first time. This year in particular there is a greater sense of anxiety because of the uncertainty created by the Liberals' absolute failure to declare what they intend to do with university funding in the future. Students, parents and universities just do not know what this government's plan is for fees in 2018 and beyond.

This Minister for Education and Training was sent in to quieten things down after the previous minister made such a comprehensive hash of university and school funding. But all we have had since the change in personnel is inaction, inertia and obfuscation. This minister has managed to deliver nothing more than cuts and force another review into the university sector. This is now the 26th review, talkfest, inquiry we have had into higher education since the Liberals came to office.

We have had the Review of the Demand Driven Funding System, the evaluation of the HEPP Program, the Higher Education Infrastructure Working Group, the assessment of Australia's publicly funded research system—all of these reviews and yet no conclusions from any of them about how universities are to be funded and what students are to pay in the future. In fact, it has been nine months since the delivery of this, the Driving innovation, fairness and excellence in Australian higher education review, with not a word from the government about what it intends to do with this options paper.

We have seen 1,200 submissions from across the university higher education sector and a panel appointed to help the government develop its response and still not a word—complete silence—on what the government's intentions are. In fact, that has forced universities into one-year funding arrangements with the government. Of course, that is difficult for universities and for their staff, who do not know whether they will have jobs next year, but it is particularly concerning for students and their parents, who do not know what the government's intention is when it comes to university fees to make up for these funding shortfalls.

What we know is that this is not about driving innovation, fairness and excellence in higher education, as the review title claims; it is about finding $3 billion worth of cuts in the university sector. That is the job that the new education minister has been given: 'Find $3 billion of cuts in universities.' We still have the 20 per cent cut to Commonwealth grants in the budget papers—that zombie measure is still in the budget papers—and a university sector that knows that the cuts are coming but does not know where they will fall. There is no plan for reforming the university sector; there is only a plan for more cuts, including the 40 per cent cut to the Higher Education Participation and Partnerships Program, the program that has been so successful at getting young Australians from disadvantaged backgrounds and from regional areas who are the first in their family to attend university to go to university and in fact supporting them to complete their studies when they get there.

All we know is that Australian students are already paying some of the highest contributions in the OECD towards their university education and that there is still a plan from this government for $100,000 university degrees. You only need to look at the history of the Liberals in this respect. From 1997 to 1999, the Howard government slashed operating grants for universities and ripped away almost five per cent of their funding. In 1997, they introduced differential HECS, raised fees and introduced—remember this?—full-fee-paying places for Australian students. The first $100,000 degree is not coming; it is not in prospect; it was in 2003 at the University of Sydney for veterinary science. It took Labor's election to reverse these $100,000 degrees for Australian undergraduate students from 2007 onwards.

Every time this government has deregulated fees, universities have almost immediately gone to the highest possible deregulated fee, just as they did in the United Kingdom. $100,000 degrees? That is what is in prospect for Australian students.

Tony Smith (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Is the motion seconded?

Terri Butler (Griffith, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I second the motion and reserve my right to speak.

Andrew Wallace (Fisher, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I am probably unusual among members of this House in having experience of both the university and the vocational education sectors in this country. Eighteen months after leaving school, I became an apprentice carpenter and joiner. I enjoyed the work and I learnt a lot from my old boss, Peter Mahony, and his foreman, David Blackburn—although they would probably beg to differ! I enjoyed the work. However, one undeniable fact that I did learn as a young apprentice was to expect very little but obstruction and intimidation from the then Builders Labourers Federation, the union that is now known as the CFMEU. But that is a story for another day.

When I examine this motion, I find that it is based on false premises which I cannot accept. First, it is based on the misplaced assertion that the government does not have a clear and well-resourced policy to support universities and ensure that all Australians are given the opportunity to get a degree. It does, as the Minister for Education and Training has laid out in this place and others.

Second, it is based on the wrong idea that the Australian university education as supported by this government is not excellent value. It is, as demonstrated by the many thousands of students from all over the world who come here to study. It is also a little-known fact that domestic university students in some courses pay as little as 20 per cent of the actual costs of their degree. That is why HECS has its name. It is the Higher Education Contribution Scheme. You would think that, if the Labor Party were so aggrieved by students having to pay for even a part of their education costs, they would reintroduce free tertiary education. But, of course, for all their posturing and confected outrage, they have not and they will not, because they are all talk and no action just like this motion put by the member for Sydney.

I want to talk about the most damaging false assumption that lies beneath this motion. It is not the university system that is letting down many young people; it is the misguided belief that going to university is the only or, indeed, best path to a better future for all of our nation's young people. We often talk about finding the jobs of the future, but there are skilled jobs crying out to be filled in this country today. The Department of Employment creates a list every year of jobs where local businesses have difficulty recruiting skilled people. Look, for example, at the skills shortage list for my state of Queensland. You will not find on that list public relations managers, civil engineers or, indeed, lawyers. These are all admirable professions filled with dedicated and skilled workers, but the fact is we have plenty of them.

What you will find on that list are the skilled workers that Queensland desperately needs; bricklayers, butchers, carpenters, joiners, painters and plasterers. You will find welders, panel beaters, machinists and chefs. Stonemasons are also on the list. So are floor tilers and roof tilers. Most of these trades are listed as a statewide shortage, meaning employers are unable to fill or have considerable difficulty filling vacancies. Consider this startling fact: in the great state of Queensland, employers are finding it nigh-impossible to get a skilled bricklayer or a skilled butcher.

The belief that a university education is the only or the best way to get ahead must take a share of the blame in creating this situation. The consequences for young people that the member for Sydney places at the government's door really come from this false assumption. Research by Graduate Careers Australia tells us that, in the first year after graduating from university, 73.9 per cent of new graduates who want one find a full-time job. Their median income is $54,000. In contrast, research from the National Centre for Vocational Education Research suggests that 77.6 per cent of VET graduates are employed after their training. Their median income is $56,000. In some parts of the construction industry electricians are earning up to $80,000 to $100,000. Of course, a university education sector is expensive. It is an intensive and resource-heavy process with no immediate commercial outcome. In contrast, an apprentice generates income from day one.

If we do not do something about our skills shortages, this country will be facing a skills shortage not seen since the Second World War.

Terri Butler (Griffith, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

This is a very important motion because Labor believes that students who have worked hard should be able to go to university without facing crippling debts but, unfortunately, we have got a government with a deregulation agenda and an agenda of cuts to public funding for universities. A 20 per cent cut to public funding of universities is still in their budget papers from the 2014 budget, which must, I would guess, go down in history as one of the worst budgets of a Commonwealth government and which certainly has had lasting negative effects on the country's economy and confidence. It is a budget that contained a number of zombie measures, and the cuts to higher-education funding are one of them.

The government currently has a consultation process in place which still flags fee deregulation for some courses, even though the electorate so comprehensively rejected fee deregulation, so comprehensively expressed outrage and concern about the prospect of degrees costing $100,000. To expect young people to be loaded up with lifelong debt in order to get an undergraduate degree is completely unreasonable and is terrible not just for the individual students themselves but, of course, for the economy as a whole. That is why the fact that there is a consultation process in place that was kicked off by a discussion paper that still flags full deregulation for some courses should be sounding significant alarm bells for the community.

We saw that there were 1,200 submissions to that consultation process. The government has created a panel to review the submissions and to report on them, but here we are around nine months later and there is still no word from the government on what we can expect from them in relation to their higher education policy. Now, that is a problem because it is already almost March and universities need to be in a position to know what is going to happen to them in 2018. More importantly, students and their families need to know what is going to be expected of them in 2018. We have not even had a policy announcement yet, let alone seen any legislation to give effect to whatever it is that the government is planning in order to find the cuts that are reflected in the 2014 budget papers.

We do not know what this government is going to do, but we do know that they are actively considering fee deregulation for at least some courses and that they are also actively considering including a loan fee on HECS, basically increasing the amount of HECS that people are expected to pay over the course of their lives and justifying that as though it were a loan fee and as though the entire cost of the higher education contribution should be treated as though the full amount of the loan being carried is something that government has borrowed, which is a ridiculous proposition. To suggest that whatever university funding is provided is 100 per cent borrowed by this government is manifestly ridiculous, and to say that you should calculate a loan fee on the basis of what the real interest rate would have been in the event it had been applied over the period of someone paying back their HECS debt is, and should rightly be, rejected. But the government is actively considering that as well. They are looking for ways to increase fees for students and, at the same time, they are looking for ways to find opportunities to cut billions of dollars from the higher education sector.

The government should rule out policies that would leave students in crippling debt. It is debt that would affect them not just now but into the future. That is particularly a problem since the government is failing to act on the issue of housing affordability, so students will take on the $100,000 degree, have the lifelong debt and then, in the future, be in a situation where in order to get a mortgage they will take on even more amounts of crippling debt. What will that mean for our economy? I think it is pretty clear that people who have massive student loans and massive mortgages are less likely to go to the coffee shop and buy a cappuccino. They are less likely to go to the bookshop. They are less likely to go and spend money in the small businesses that rely on people being customers in order for their businesses to operate. The government should think very clearly before loading up young people in this country with further debt in order for them to get an education.

Going to university should depend on hard work and not on your parents' wealth. That is an important principle. Yet in this country it is still the situation that kids who are from lower income backgrounds and kids who are from other groups that have traditionally been disadvantaged are under-represented in higher education. The government, by the $152 million cut to the HEPPP, the Higher Education Participation and Partnerships Program, is making it harder for universities to reach out to under-represented students. That is a real shame because it is Indigenous students who will suffer, it is prospective students from Indigenous backgrounds who will suffer, as will students with a disability and students from low-income backgrounds.

Education is an essential ingredient of economic growth. The university sector deserves some certainty, and so do the people of Australia.

Karen Andrews (McPherson, Liberal Party, Assistant Minister for Vocational Education and Skills) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

It is my pleasure to start today by congratulating all of those students who have taken the opportunity to continue their education, whether that be through vocational education or through to universities. Congratulations! I think that in continuing your education you have certainly chosen wisely.

It is true that we do have a record number of students in the higher education system. More than 1 million Australians are at university or are studying at other non-university institutions of higher education. The Turnbull government is investing a record $16.7 billion this financial year, 2016-17, to provide even more opportunities for students across Australia, particularly in regional Australia, to have a higher education.

There are a couple of issues that I would particularly like to touch on today, and I would like to start by focusing on the coalition's commitment to the education highway, which I have previously spoken about a number of times in this place. The coalition sees education as a highway, which starts effectively at preschool, goes through school, and potentially goes through vocational education and on to higher education, to university. We do not necessarily see each part as a discrete and mutually exclusive part. They are all interconnected.

As the Assistant Minister for Vocational Education and Skills, I am very much focused on vocational education to make sure that we are attracting people into the sector. I see and the Turnbull government sees vocational education as part of the education highway. It is a destination in itself but it is also an opportunity for students to at some stage look at moving from vocational education to universities, should they wish to. So, vocational education is certainly a destination in its own right, but it is also a pathway through to universities for those who choose it. What we need to do is make sure that we are properly equipping our students as they go through school for higher education, tertiary education.

There is one area that is particularly concerning to the coalition, and that is ensuring that our students have the appropriate skills in the STEM subjects—science, technology, engineering and maths. We know that we are already lagging behind in those areas, particularly when you compare us internationally. I do have some statistics that I think are useful to once again put on the record in relation to science, technology, engineering and maths and what is happening in our schools at the moment. If you compare the figures from 1992 to 2012—so, over a 20-year period—there were 30,800 more students in year 12 in 2012 to what there were in 1992, but there was a significant decrease in the number of students who were studying the science and maths subjects. There were 8,000 fewer physics students, 4,000 fewer chemistry students and 12,000 fewer biology students. The Turnbull government are very committed to making sure that we turn that around.

As part of the National Innovation and Science Agenda that was released over 12 months ago, we looked particularly at what we could do to increase the STEM skills. We recognised that we needed to start developing the pipeline, and that is why we have injected money into the preschool area, into kindergartens, to make sure our students have access to science and maths so that they develop what hopefully will be a lifelong understanding and commitment to science and maths as they go from kindergarten, all the way through their school years and on to tertiary education.

What we are very conscious of is the number of students who are choosing at year 11 and 12 to do a lower level maths, thinking that that will give them the best possible ATAR or in Queensland, for example, at the moment, the OP. What that does is potentially put these students somewhat behind the eight ball when they go to university to study courses such as engineering, where they do not have the higher level maths that they need. So what the Turnbull government is committed to is developing that education pipeline so that our students from the kindergarten years through to years 11 and 12 are developing a lifelong interest and the skills in the STEM subjects so that they can take on the careers of the future. This is where our focus is—not looking at it in isolation, one part of education, but looking at the totality.

Justine Elliot (Richmond, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise to speak in favour of the member for Sydney's motion regarding this government's constant cuts and attacks on our universities. It is indeed a very timely motion, with so many new students starting uni and with orientation weeks across the country last week. With more than a million students resuming their university studies in the coming weeks, it is very timely that we are discussing this very important motion.

I particularly note in this motion the government's failure to release its plans for university funding and fees and the real uncertainty this creates for students planning to commence their studies in 2018 and beyond. This government repeatedly puts forward plans to cut university funding. The magnitude of these cuts will not only put at risk the quality of higher education provided by Australian universities but they are also at odds with the government's rhetoric, which claims they want to reinvigorate the economy through education, research and innovation. Well, you cannot do that by cutting education funding—that is the reality. Australia's world-class university system is evolving to support a transition that is under way across the economy and workforce, a process that cannot be achieved while making cuts of this scale.

It was Labor that opened the doors of our universities to thousands more Australians, and we are very proud of that. A Labor government would stand on our strong record of investment in education, including at the last election where we committed to investing more in our universities and significantly increasing per student funding and investing more in schools, because success at university depends on a great school education. In fact, Labor went to the last election with a promise to spend around $50 billion on universities and schools, which is the same amount the Liberals and Nationals are prepared to give away in tax cuts to big business and multinationals. It is all a question of priorities and all a question of choices. We choose funding education; they choose tax breaks for multinationals and big business. It shows what their priorities are.

Labor's story has always been one of vision; we have always been the party committed to education. In contrast, the Liberal-National government's counterproductive plan for our education system includes wanting to introduce $100,000 degrees, creating unfair debts for students and ensuring only the most well-off would get to go to university. This is especially unfair for those kids from rural and regional areas, like my electorate in northern New South Wales. Parents constantly tell me that university is just not going to be on their radar for their children if we see these massive increases and we see $100,000 university degrees.

It is estimated that by 2020, two out of every three jobs created in Australia will require a diploma or a higher qualification. The government's policies fail to recognise this and would see us fall behind, committing us to a lower standard of living and lower incomes for those students. The reality is that universities across Australia are facing very significant budget cuts under this government. It is a concern for students, for their parents, for their families and for teaching staff right across the board. These are major, major cuts that they are looking at and they will be absolutely catastrophic.

We have seen all sorts of evidence from economists, the OECD, the Australia Institute and so many others that show investment in education builds a more prosperous nation, it is good for our economy, it is good for our students and that there are multiple benefits. At present, Australian students already pay some of the highest tuition fees in the OECD, second only to the US. Under these circumstances already, the Turnbull government's plans to cut public investment by at least 20 per cent per student and make students pay significantly more cannot be justified. It is a cruel choice and an unfair choice as well. It will impact those in our communities who most need to support to actually get to university.

The government is also cutting $152 million in funding from the Higher Education Participation and Partnerships Program. This program is a very important one that aims to ensure that those Australians from lower socioeconomic backgrounds who have the ability to study at university have the opportunity to actually get there—but the government wants to cut that. This program provides funding to assist universities to undertake activities and implement strategies that improve access to undergraduate courses, as well as, really importantly, improve the retention and completion rates of those students to actually keep them at university. Of course, the government is going to cut that, because it is a program that will help so many students, particularly from those lower socioeconomic backgrounds. Funding for this program and funding for a full Indigenous program should be restored to assist universities with these essential targeted equity and access programs. That is what we need to have in place.

But in recent years, higher education policy has been in chaos under this government. During the election, the Liberal-National government did not release a single higher education policy, because, quite frankly, they do not care. Instead, they have had 25 reviews, inquiries and talkfests—that is all we hear. They have got these massive cuts in place, in addition to the uncertainty of the one-year funding agreements that are really holding back our universities and our students. Anybody who says that there is not a relationship between funding and the quality of education is just kidding themselves; it is an excuse to not properly fund it. Labor believes education is critical to Australia's future and to a strong economy for secure jobs.

Rowan Ramsey (Grey, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

It is a pleasure to rise on this motion from the member for Sydney on higher education. It is interesting to listen to the member for Richmond speaking about Labor's vision for higher education and education generally. Labor's record in office is an absolutely classic example of the Labor Party doing the easy half of the workload: spending the money, but not making a serious effort to fund it. Of course, that was the case when they uncapped the university places in Australia. They delivered half the deal.

Since that time in 2008, places have grown exponentially by 71 per cent, compared to 35 per cent growth in GDP in those eight years. Something has to give. We have faced the same conundrum in a number of other policy areas where Labor has implemented a vast plan for the future with no plan on how to fund it. We are left with some fairly unpleasant types of solutions that we can ponder in this place. We could cut intake numbers, I suppose. We could trim VET FEE-HELP. We could find savings in other programs, something that the Labor Party consistently opposes—any savings in any other area. We could raise taxes. Already, Mr Deputy Speaker, as you well know, this country is falling well behind and well out of step with our trading partners when it comes to general taxation and specific taxation across a wide range of measures. Whatever we do, if we continue to get out of step with our trading partners, it will come to no good.

And of course there is the issue raising its head now. We do not have an answer on this at the moment. Former students are coming to me in increasing numbers and saying: 'I've done my university degree, but I can't get a job. There are too many students in this area that are qualified in my industry.' The coalition will not be keen to move in that area of capping places, but I think we have to start putting some pressure on the universities to take some responsibility for the numbers of students they are accepting into certain courses. They have a responsibility beyond just delivering the degree. They have a responsibility to say to the student at the beginning of the course, 'You have a reasonable prospect of getting a job when you finish.' Theoretically, the market should sort this sort of thing out, but markets are often too slow an indicator to bring about change in time.

We must be collectively up to having an honest and open debate about the issue. Something has to be done in higher education. As the Labor Party knows and as you know, Mr Deputy Speaker, we have already tried in a previous parliament to make moves to make the income from education more closely match the expenditure.

The proposition that is put forward by the Labor Party that somehow the coalition is withdrawing money from higher education is an absolute fabrication. There is a record amount of $16.7 billion per year. There is something about a record. A record indicates that it has not been done before, that $16.7 billion a year has not been spent before by the Commonwealth on education. We cannot listen to an argument that says we—the parliament, the government—are cutting funding for education when in fact we are reaching record levels. Funding cannot continue to grow as a proportion of GDP unless we savage some other part of the economy. If we do not do anything, our tertiary sector will fall behind, and—this is the very important point—if we allow it to fall behind, one of our greatest export earners as a country will be emasculated.

In the last parliament we tried to uncap fees, and we have taken that off the table. Our opponents, the Labor Party, used that to bludgeon us around the head about $100,000 degrees, which were of course a complete beat-up, a beat-up of the first order. To continue to use that language after we have taken that option off the table is misleading. In another place, I would use a stronger word, and it would start with an L. We will bring reforms to this parliament by midyear.

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

I rise to support the motion by the member for Sydney on behalf of all university students in all universities but particularly the more than 13,000 students who attend Griffith University, in my electorate of Moreton. Today is their first day of lectures for 2017, apart from those hardworking souls who did the summer subjects. For many it will be their first ever day at university, the beginning of what we hope will be an amazing journey. I wish them all the best for their studies, especially my niece Erin Shearer and Ella Harrison from Warwick.

Last Tuesday, I had the pleasure of attending the O-Week Market Day at the Nathan Campus of Griffith University. I spoke with Lucas Kennedy, the president of the Student Representative Council, about campus life and what students are concerned about. Like many of his fellow students, Lucas said his family encouraged him to go to university so that he could launch himself into a good job and get ahead, but Lucas questions why he should be saddled with unreasonable debt when he graduates. Unlike my generation, many first year university students commencing today will graduate with a hefty debt. They will know the burden of debt before they have the satisfaction of starting their careers. We know how unaffordable housing is becoming, and these young Australians will be saddled with debt before they can even think about saving for a house. Universities should not only be for the elite. They should be the melting pots in our society, where our brightest come together, bringing all parts of our community together to learn, to research, to make discovers that will make all of our lives better and to develop the industries of the future and, more importantly, the jobs of the future. That is where the jobs and growth will come from.

It is critical that university education be accessible to all Australians who have the drive and the ability to learn. We do not want our tertiary education system to become Americanised. We need our best and brightest to be given opportunities, not constrained by their postcode. We do not want our children paying $100,000 degrees. I know $100,000 might not be much for those living in harbourside mansions, but it actually is a lot of money for most Australians. To a 17-year-old or an 18-year-old school leaver, it could be the factor that makes them decide to not continue their education—and what a terrible waste of human resources that would be. It should not be your parent's bank balance that determines whether you go to university.

Lucas is also worried about budget cuts at Griffith University. He says the cuts will see two staff per department cut. It will also mean that amenities will not be upgraded or new ones that are needed will not be installed. Lucas showed me a mother's room at the Nathan Campus that needs an upgrade. This space is for student mothers with children; it is a space for them to breastfeed their babies. It is a facility that is particularly important for women who are reskilling for the workforce. And Mr Turnbull has just made it a whole lot harder for university students to get through their university years. How? When we see the Fair Work Commission's decision to cut the penalty rates of some of Australia's lowest paid workers, who will this hit hardest? Women, especially, but also university students who find time to work on the weekend. I spoke to Lucas about this decision and asked him how it would affect students at Griffith uni. He told that me that he believes it will force more students to work more hours during the week, taking them out of classes and tutorials.

Could the Turnbull government make it any harder for our young Australians who are just trying to get ahead in life? Well, they are. This week they have introduced a bill that will have young people wait five weeks before they can access Newstart. The government want to push 22- to 24-year-olds onto the lower Youth Allowance, which will mean a cut of about $48 per week. It is easy to see where the priorities of this government are. They are giving a pay cut to young students and preventing them from accessing Newstart for five weeks; and they are intent on making them pay $100,000 for their degrees, all the while focusing on giving a tax break to big multinational companies, which will be a $50 billion tax give-away. What sort of skewed value system is that? There is a quote from Confucius, which says:

If your plan is for one year plant rice. If your plan is for ten years plant trees. If your plan is for one hundred years educate children.

Sadly, Prime Minister Turnbull's only plan is to keep his own job—and that is deplorable.

Labor will fight for students to get a fair go, to be paid a fair return for their work on weekends, to get the help they need when they need it and to make sure they can get a university education if they have the ability, drive and talent. The future of Australia will be determined by the education we give our young Australians today. Sadly, the Turnbull government and the National Party are betraying the bush when it comes to education, and we see that in the front-page story of The Australian today. I am proud to commend this motion to the House.

Jason Wood (La Trobe, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise to speak on the motion regarding university funding and fees, a private member's motion from the member for Sydney. In 2016, we had Monash University in my electorate of La Trobe. Monash University's Berwick campus offered, from memory, four courses. Then we got the incredible news that the Monash campus in Berwick had decided to close shop and were planning to move out. That was of great concern, obviously, for the students currently undertaking courses, whether it be for business or for nursing.

The approach of the Labor Party at the time was basically to just attack, attack and attack, but they came up no solutions. What we realised we needed in our electorate was—and this is something the Prime Minister has been a great advocate for—innovation and research, and ensuring that, when our students graduate from university, they actually have jobs in their field rather than leaving university and not having a job to go to. I know that is something Minister Simon Birmingham has been a great advocate of. Also, we need to make sure business actually works with universities. There is no use in students going to universities and doing degrees if there are no jobs at the end of their university courses.

I am very proud to say that, working with Minister Birmingham, the great news is we now have Federation University Australia coming to the old Monash-Berwick campus. This is something we said right from the start. We want to focus on innovation. We want to focus on research. The courses they will be offering include a Bachelor of Community and Human Services, a Bachelor of Business and a Bachelor of Business (Human Resource Management). There will also be a number of marketing courses, accounting courses and education courses. There will be a Bachelor of Information Technology, a Bachelor of Information Technology (Business Information Systems) and a Bachelor of Information Technology (Mobile App Development). To me, it is so important to have young people in Australia—and, obviously, locally in La Trobe—want to get back into research and developing apps, which not only are great for the community but also potentially create businesses for them. So this is something that we in La Trobe are very much looking forward to. There will also be a Bachelor of Veterinary and Wildlife Science, and they will have flexible modes of delivery for nursing courses.

At the same time, the Turnbull government recognises that this system must be affordable and provide a return on investment for both the student and the nation. Remember that taxpayers across the country are paying for students to go to university. That is something we support, but it is something which needs to always be remembered. A key challenge is how to make the system sustainable for generations of students in the future. The Turnbull government released the policy paper Driving innovation, fairness and excellence in Australian higher education on budget night last year and invited submissions on how best to ensure we keep the system sustainable and affordable for future generations of Australians. The Turnbull government legislated a package of higher education reforms in the middle of the year to provide the sector sufficient time to implement the new arrangements from 1 January 2018.

Australia has one of the most generous student loan schemes in the world: the Higher Education Loan Program, otherwise known as HELP. This means that Australians can go to universities or other higher education providers without paying up-front fees, and that is something that is very important. We will keep the loan system in place. Our policy option paper released on budget night proposed that all students be charged the same loan fee to partly recover the costs their fellow Australians are subsidising. I repeat that; this is something really important. The local tradie may be an apprentice, but their apprenticeship will not take four or five years, whereas someone else is actually going to university. We want people to go to university and we want to support those in university, but it has to be fair and balanced. That is what the Turnbull government is endeavouring to do. Unlike Labor, who cut $6 billion from research, we support research, we support innovation and we support students to get the best out of their university qualifications.

Joanne Ryan (Lalor, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I am thrilled to rise today to support the member for Sydney's motion—an incredibly important motion, I might say. During O-week around the country, our university students headed off for their academic year—a year of uncertainty not just for those students but for the institutions, the universities themselves. We can place responsibility for that right at the feet of those sitting opposite in this House today.

I am pleased to join the member for Sydney, the member for Griffith, the member for Richmond and the member for Moreton on this side, who stand with me today to put a spike in the ground that says: 'We will back students in this country. We will back young people from our electorates accessing university and being successful at university.' Those opposite use coded words like 'sustainable and affordable'. Since the election of the government, which used to be the Abbott government but now is the Turnbull government and tomorrow could be anybody's government, we know that, when they use words like 'sustainable and affordable', that is code for cuts and for narrowing who can potentially attend university. Make no mistake.

Today we have heard from the other side lots of rhetoric about graduates going to university and then not being able to get a job. They are bleeding hearts over there about these young people who go to university, get a certification and then cannot get a job. They like competition everywhere else, but they do not like competition when a kid from Lalor is knocking a kid from one of their electorates out of a job because they got into university.

It is Labor's legacy and Labor's history that means that children in my electorate are focused and keen to get a university education. I stand here as somebody who spent years of their professional life teaching year 12 students, supporting year 12 students, being a coordinator for year 12 students and sitting with them to talk about university and what it would mean for them. I was not in classrooms when $100,000 degrees and deregulation were mooted by the government, those opposite. But I can tell you I know the ramifications of the increase in the debt to students in homes around Australia. It means that working-class kids, kids whose parents did not go to university, will face an extra hurdle. That hurdle is actually convincing their parents that this is a good idea, that debt is a good idea, that there is a brighter future where they can get an education and get one of those good jobs that the Prime Minister and the member for Deakin like to talk about so they can buy a house.

There is absolutely no doubt that the uncertainty in this sector is being driven by this do-nothing government that just continue their out-of-touch ways to breed uncertainty not just in the university sector but in the school sector and the early childhood education sector. When it comes to education, they are casting about for ideas and delivering nothing for Australian children.

Let's go to the things that the government are doing on the ground that, layer upon layer, are undermining our young people from getting ahead in life. I have spent time looking at this across the last 12 months. In fact, this time last year the office phone started to ring with calls from students in my electorate who were going to university, who had been to O Week and who were off and running—except there were delays at Centrelink for up to five months for those students to get their youth allowance. Then we saw headlines about student dropout rates. It is no surprise students are dropping out if they have not got money to put food on their own table, to put petrol in their car or, in Victoria, to top up their Myki ticket to get to university.

On top of that, there was the decision this week of this government to not put in a submission on behalf of those young people around this country to the Fair Work Commission around penalty rates. They should be held accountable. All of these students this year will wait probably another five months, given the delays at Centrelink that are occurring, for their youth allowance. In the meantime, they are going to take a hit to their penalty rates on Sundays. This government are doing nothing to support the education of students from my electorate. They are doing a lot to lock out kids from electorates like mine around this country from opportunities, from being aspirational and from a good future. We should not be surprised. We have a Prime Minister who suggests parents should shell out for everything. So the message from this government to kids in my electorate is: get yourself some rich parents. This is not enough. The member for Sydney has it right.

Nicolle Flint (Boothby, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The coalition government have made fixing Labor's higher education mess a priority, and I commend my South Australian colleague Minister Simon Birmingham on spearheading this effort. The approach of the Labor Party when in government could not have been more different to the coalition's. We have made a record investment in higher education, we have brought certainty to researchers, we are reversing the downward trend by prioritising STEM subjects and we are cleaning up Labor's failing VET system that left students laden with debt and no qualifications to show for it.

It is shameful to see Labor coming into this place pretending to care about students and researchers when they slashed $6 billion from higher education and research funding when in office. By contrast, we came into government with an agenda to improve the higher education system. In 2016-17 we have invested a record $16.7 billion into the sector. This is an achievement in itself but it is not what I am going to focus on because any government can spend money. The hard part is making sure it is well spent. This is the job the government have taken on and we have made real reforms to improve the system.

We have given the Tertiary Education Quality Standards Agency a mandate to improve standards in the sector. We will not let our education standards slip, and the agency have been given $10.1 million to support their work. We also commissioned the Higher Education Standards Panel to make recommendations on improving transparency around university admission practices. The government have accepted its recommendations and are implementing them.

The coalition are putting students first. We are ensuring school leavers and students have all the information on courses to help them make better choices about what they learn. Too often students do not know what they want to do or what they are exactly enrolling in and slip through the gaps. Trial and error is a natural part of studying at university, but the $8 million we have provided to develop the Quality Indicators for Learning and Teaching website will help students make the right choice the first time, saving valuable money and time. These are real improvements to the higher education system that Labor left in disarray. This is the smart policy work we are undertaking and it is very different to the work of Labor, who simply throw taxpayers' money at the problem and think their job is done.

This government are also turning the tide in the uptake of STEM subjects through the National Innovation and Science Agenda. We are ensuring Australians are digitally literate and ready to compete globally in the 21st century. The $1.1 billion agenda will support research and promote science, maths and computing in schools, which will directly feed into the uptake of these subjects at university. As you can see, we are making the smart policy decisions that will see us well placed for the future. We are spending taxpayers' money effectively and efficiently, not wasting it as Labor did in office.

Labor claim to support researchers but they left the National Collaborative Research Infrastructure Strategy in disarray. The opposition refused to fund the strategy, leaving 1,700 experts and technicians uncertain about their future. The lack of care of Labor shows just how little they actually understand research and development in Australian universities and why they cannot be trusted to take a mature approach to scientific investment in Australia.

The idea that Labor care about student debt is also laughable. The VET FEE-HELP system Labor set up in 2012 became one of the biggest rorts in recent times—and that is saying something! It will go down in history alongside pink batts, the school halls debacle and cash for clunkers. The difference with this rort is that students were the target. Under this scheme, VET FEE-HELP increased by 5,000 per cent and the average course costs skyrocketed from $4,000 to $14,000. Student loans increased by 11,000 per cent from $26 million to $2.9 billion. The end product of this was that students were loaded up with debts and, with no protections from course providers, many had no qualifications to show for it.

The coalition have passed legislation and put in place 20 reforms to fix this mess. It should be clear to Australians that: where Labor fails university students, we stand by them; where Labor abandons researchers, we will support their important work; and, where Labor implements poor public policy, as usual, we will be left with the task of cleaning up Labor's mess.

Rob Mitchell (McEwen, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The time allotted for this debate has expired. The debate is adjourned and the resumption of the debate will be made an order of the day for the next sitting.