Terri Butler (Griffith, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Assistant Minister for Preventing Family Violence) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I move:

That this House:

(1) notes that:

  (a) the government’s short-sighted $2.2 billion in cuts to universities are equivalent to more than 9,500 Australians missing out on a university place in 2018, and again in 2019;

  (b) across the country this month, students will be attending university, with orientation periods beginning, and that these students are faced with more uncertainty about how the cuts will affect their student experience; and

  (c) the government’s short-sighted cuts will hurt regional and outer metropolitan universities and their students the most; and

(2) calls on the government to reverse its short-sighted, unfair cuts to universities, which are closing the door of opportunity to thousands of Australians.

We've seen from this government nothing but attacks on young people and attacks on our nation's future. Unfortunately, the recent cuts to university funding are consistent with that theme. We live now at a time of increasing and significant inequality in wealth and incomes in our nation. If we seek to deal with the fact that, for example, the lion's share of the national income goes to profits at the expense of wages, if we seek to deal with the fact that social mobility is at risk of lessening, if we seek to deal with the fact that wages growth is the slowest it's been since we started keeping the wages price index in 1997, if we seek to deal with the worsening inequality that our nation is currently facing, we know that one of the means, if not the best means, to deal with that inequality is education. Education, as Thomas Piketty said in his book Capital, is a great force for convergence, rather than divergence, and it's important to us as a nation that we do take action in relation to that growing inequality. It's also important to recognise that universities and funding for education make a contribution to the question of inequality, which is deeply important because of the impacts that widening inequality have, not just on the lifestyles of the individuals concerned but on the economic life of the nation.

Education is also important because we are at a time of rapid change in relation to the nature of work. I'm not a pessimist about what that may mean, but if we want to be able to take advantage of the possibilities for the future and if we want young people to be able to have the skills and the knowledge that they will need for the jobs of the future, then that means a real focus on education, not exclusively on higher education, of course, but this motion is about higher education so I'll go to that.

There are good, sound, solid economic reasons to focus on having appropriate funding for higher education and for education generally. In addition to the domestic reasons, we should not forget the issue of trade. International education together with international tourism are our key services exports. They are incredibly important not just in terms of services exports but in terms of exports more broadly. We absolutely should be seeking to encourage our universities to strive to be world class. We should do that not only for the domestic benefits but for their assistance in attracting international students. We need to attract more international students. Our competitor countries in the region are funding their publicly funded universities to a greater degree. They're putting more public funding behind universities.

While this is happening—while we have increasing inequality, while we have some very concerning economic indicators and while our competitor nations are putting money into higher education—what's Australia doing? I'm sad to say that the Turnbull government are cutting funding to universities. It's their third chop at it. When they were first elected it was a 20 per cent cut and full fee deregulation, which would have seen $100,000 degrees. Happily, we were able to stop that. Then in their next iteration, last year, they wanted to hike up fees by 7.5 per cent, have a commensurate cut in university funding, have a further cut to university funding and then drop the HECS repayment threshold down to about $45,000. We saw that one off as well, not just us, of course, but the community, stakeholders, students, families—just people who were worried about whether their kids would be able to get a higher education. This idea of increasing university fees at a time when Australian households are facing record household debt and so loading them up with more debt is a very silly one. It's not just silly for those individuals. What will be the effect on national consumption if we are asking people to carry more debt into their 20s and 30s and beyond? It's a bad idea, it was bad policy and I'm glad we were able to see it off.

I do regret to say that the government are now cutting $2.2 billion from higher education. They're freezing levels for 2018 and 2019.

Mr Wallace interjecting—

I hear the member for Fisher saying, 'Rubbish.' It's not rubbish. Maybe he ought to go and crack a book some time and see what's being said by the sector and by families in his electorate who are worried about whether their children will be able to get a university degree. Universities Australia have estimated that 9½ thousand people this year and 9½ thousand people next year will be affected by these cuts. It's only the beginning and the government should be ashamed.

Maria Vamvakinou (Calwell, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I need a seconder for the motion.

Susan Lamb (Longman, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I second the motion.

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

I'm grateful to the member for Griffith for the opportunity to set the record straight on university funding as well as to tell the chamber about the exceptional university which I have in the electorate of Fisher and what it is achieving with the support of the Turnbull government. What marks out the University of the Sunshine Coast, in particular, is its relentless pursuit of innovation. Under the leadership of its dynamic vice-chancellor, Greg Hill, USC is continuously looking for new ways to grow and lead. The member for Griffith will have seen some of this when she visited USC's panoramic three-dimensional visualisation and virtual reality site, CAVE, just last year. Unfortunately, she's left us now.

The team at USC founded the University of the Sunshine Coast innovation centre which has become the heart of a fast-growing commercial innovation community. In part due to this facility, the Sunshine Coast has been awarded Google eTown status, and has been named a Smart21 community in three of the past four years.

I'm delighted to say that I have been able to play my part in supporting USC's growth and innovation with funding from the Turnbull government. Last year, we delivered $5 million for the Thompson Institute at USC. This funding went to treatment and research into suicide prevention, dementia and youth mental health, and will ensure that the Sunshine Coast remains at the cutting edge of these fields for years to come. I'm continuing to work with USC and the Thompson Institute to explore funding opportunities for groundbreaking research into PTSD suffered by veterans and emergency service workers.

I have also worked closely with USC to take advantage of the government's $200 billion defence capability investment. Not only have USC already won a $2.85 million contract to conduct research into runway pavements for the Department of Defence but they have worked closely with me as part of the Fisher Defence Industry Initiative to look at ways in which they can win more and collaborate with our growing local defence industry sector.

USC is growing fast and servicing new regional areas. The Turnbull government has also lent a hand here as well, with a $120 million concessional loan to build a new, 10,000-student campus in Petrie. However, none of this would have been possible without the Turnbull government's ongoing commitment to tertiary education and the record levels of funding we have provided to universities. Right now, the Turnbull government is providing record total funding for universities—that is, $17.2 billion in 2017. Labor, with its typical disregard for the truth, is suggesting in this motion and elsewhere that in the future the Turnbull government will cut this funding. You can only cry wolf so many times. This is simply not true. Between 2017 and 2021, direct funding for teaching and research will grow by eight per cent, from $10.7 billion this year to $11.5 billion. This is yet another iteration of Labor's disgraceful and untruthful 'Mediscare' campaign. If universities maintain their current enrolment rates, health expenditure will go up from $6.4 billion to $7.4 billion, meaning total funding will increase by 11 per cent.

The Turnbull government is particularly committed to regional universities. We've invested more than half a billion dollars in the Higher Education Participation and Partnerships Program to help regional students access university. We've allocated a further $24 million to support regional students to undertake STEM degrees, as well as $285 million in regional loading and $15 million for eight new regional university hubs.

This motion also falsely suggests that students will face additional uncertainty. The truth is quite the opposite. Under the government's reforms, students will now have certainty that their student fees will not rise. They will have certainty that the Commonwealth will continue to pay for more than half of the cost of their degrees, as well as providing generous loan terms to pay for the rest. These reforms give young people the certainty that university funding is sustainable and that they will not need to pay one dollar up-front for a university education in the years to come. In all reform processes, there are individual complexities that arise; in the case of USC's large-scale and ongoing regional expansion, I know that constructive discussions are taking place to ensure that the reforms have their intended effect. However, what we've seen today is that on university funding, as on schools funding and Medicare, Labor time and again are distorting the truth for their own political ends.

The University of the Sunshine Coast is a fantastic university and this government will continue to support it.

Chris Hayes (Fowler, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

As many students are returning to university or embarking on their first experience in higher education, the member for Griffith is right in that we should reflect on this government's $2.2 billion cuts to universities, cuts which this government is now implementing through a two-year freeze on Commonwealth grant funding for teaching and learning. Put these cuts in perspective. They're the equivalent of 9,500 young Australians missing out on university placements during 2018-19. Adding to this far-reaching impact on our universities is the government's mid-year budget announcement, which is set to cost the Western Sydney University an estimated $5.7 million this year alone. This means they'll have very little left to continue their longstanding support for business and start-ups across Western Sydney. These cuts leave many students with uncertainty. Professor Margaret Gardner, the chair of Universities Australia, correctly described the cuts as:

… a “double whammy” on students—both by lifting fees and eroding funding for courses, student learning and student support.

Nonetheless, we have the Turnbull government claiming that these cuts are 'sustainable' and 'student focused'. By the way, this is the same rhetoric that this government tried to have us believe when it attempted to legislate the original cuts to universities. Those measures, as we all know, were rejected by the Senate, and rejected for good reason: it's bad policy. The government is relentless in its attack on universities and continues the attack now through the back door. Barney Glover, the vice-chancellor and president of Western Sydney University, succinctly summed up the ramifications by stating that these changes the government is proposing constitute a significant risk to the sustainability, quality and competitiveness of Australian universities.

Of course, you can't expect those opposite to understand the impact of these cuts. After all, they're the same bunch who cut $17 billion from our schools and almost $650 million from our TAFE colleges, and now they're doing the same to our universities. All the while, they're so committed to handing out $65 billion in tax cuts to millionaires, big business and the top end of town. I have a piece of advice for those opposite: if you can't afford the tax cuts, don't do it. And don't do it at the expense of our future generations. The unfairness of these cuts is plain. The government keeps proving that they can't be trusted when it comes to important investments for our nation. An investment in education is an investment for our future. It's an investment in the nation's future. There is probably no greater investment that could be made by government.

The government says universities understand and are compliant with their approach. Just for the record, they're not terribly impressed. Peter Hoj, chair of the Group of Eight, said they've now reached a tipping point. He said the government was treating the sector like a 'cash cow to be milked for budget cuts' rather than a means to improve the career opportunities of young people. These measures will no doubt have a significant impact on the most disadvantaged in our society. For many in my electorate of Fowler, these cuts will be critical. As Professor Barney Glover noted, the cuts may have an unintended impost on, for example, mature age students, Indigenous students, and individuals with interrupted career paths or reduced employment due to childminding and other life events.

I know what tertiary education means to communities like mine. My electorate in Western Sydney, as you know, is not a rich community. As a matter of fact, it has significant pockets of disadvantage. My electorate is made up disproportionately of migrants and refugees. Tertiary education to them is very important. They see its value not just as a source of knowledge but as a pathway to changing their lives for the better. These cuts are unfair. They are not good for our universities. They're not good for our students. They're not good for our economy and they're certainly not good for the future prosperity of our nation.

Luke Howarth (Petrie, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I reject the motion put forward by the member for Griffith and the numerous negative assertions she has made. It's a political stunt; she couldn't even be bothered to stick around for the motion and listen to every speaker. She left early, as did the member for Longman, who seconded the motion, yet there are some great opportunities in the Moreton Bay region that will directly affect the member for Longman's constituents. She couldn't be bothered to stick around either.

In 2013, funding for the higher education sector was $14.9 billion. This year it's $17.5 billion. That's a $2.6 billion increase from when I was elected in 2013. That's not a cut; that's a $2.6 billion increase. This is a problem with Australian politics today and what we're seeing from many people opposite: campaigns built around untruths. The Australian public are seeing through this. Universities across Australia have seen a 71 per cent gross increase since 2009. In my region and the member for Fairfax's region, the University of the Sunshine Coast has seen a 150 per cent increase.

We live in a country full of opportunities, and any Australian wanting to study at university can. The only reason the government is making some changes now is that legislation that would have seen benefits to young people right across this country was rejected by Labor, the Greens and the Nick Xenophon Team. The biggest lie in the campaign that we've heard from some members opposite is that we'd see an increase in costs for young people studying. We hear that somehow there are going to be $100,000 degrees. But everyone in this place knows—and for everyone listening—the government pay 60 per cent of the cost, so why on earth would we want education funding costs for universities to go up? If we have to pay $60,000 of a degree and a student pays $40,000, why would we want a $100,000 degree? No-one's been able to answer that, of course.

Our changes to the higher education system were not taken lightly. We received 1,200 submissions from higher education institutions and peak bodies and representation from industries, professionals and individuals. Even Labor's own education shadow minister admitted there was a problem, and back in 2013 they announced $6.6 billion of cuts—if you take their line in relation to this—to higher education and research. At the time, former Prime Minister Gillard announced some changes and Maxine McKew was critical of that, as was the headline in 2013, 'Labor to fight higher education cuts proposed by Labor: Kim Carr'.

But that's enough negativity; let's get onto what's happening locally in the electorate of Petrie and in the member for Dickson's area. I want to thank the Minister for Home Affairs, the member for Dickson, because we've both been fighting for young people in our own electorates. In my electorate at the moment there is no university. I don't have any university at all in my electorate, but we will ensure that the University of the Sunshine Coast will build a new university at the old Petrie paper mill, which will start in 2020. We were able to secure a $35 million grant to help get the Moreton Bay university established through the council—to get ground works and everything happening. They are happening right now, as I speak. We were also able to secure a loan of $121 million for the University of the Sunshine Coast to get those buildings underway.

This morning I met with a representative at the University of the Sunshine Coast, who said some very kind words in relation to what we're doing for universities and young people in our electorates. We have seen base funding for Commonwealth supported places at the University of the Sunshine Coast increase by 152 per cent, which I mentioned earlier. As a father of three young sons, who are 15, 13 and 11, I'm passionate about making sure that the education system is sustainable long into the future. These changes are doing that. In regional areas, we've seen over half a billion dollars for the Higher Education Participation and Partnerships Program over the forward estimates to help regional students access university, and it goes on. I'm very pleased to be able to talk on this. I look forward to the University of the Sunshine Coast opening our new campus in Moreton Bay in 2020. It will provide great opportunities for young people in my electorate.

Rebekha Sharkie (Mayo, Nick Xenophon Team) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise to support the motion moved by the member for Griffith. In doing so, I want to reflect on a speech I made during the debate on the higher education reform package in September last year. In that speech, I quoted the Prime Minister, who, in his first statement as leader of this country, identified that the Australia of the future has to be agile and innovative. I was pleased when the government decided not to pursue its reform package in the Senate after I and my Nick Xenophon Team colleagues publicly announced that we wouldn't be supporting the package until there was a comprehensive root-and-branch review into the post-secondary education system. Of course, that pleasure turned to dismay on 18 December, when $2.2 billion worth of cuts were announced in MYEFO. We've already seen regional universities coming out and saying they're feeling the brunt of those cuts.

These new cuts are far-reaching. They have placed an effective cap on student places. I'm on the record as saying that I believe the demand-driven system has led to perverse outcomes for vocational education and training. But to put a cap on student places without a thorough review about how best to position our education sector shows that these cuts are not about promoting sustainability or protecting the future of education in this country. These cuts are simply hacks, and they are hacks to please the Treasurer, with no comprehensive plan for the future. For a government that prides itself on its innovation agenda, cutting university funding to manage the bottom line is not acceptable, and it's very short-sighted.

Let's not forget that both the former, Labor government and the current government have cut a total of $3.4 billion from the university sector in recent years. The impact of university cuts has hit home for me, particularly in my home state of South Australia, because it's undergoing a period of economic transformation. If university research is the cornerstone of innovation, then cuts to universities threaten their capacity to continue to innovate. In South Australia, we cannot afford to take that risk.

I recently visited the Flinders University Tonsley campus at the Tonsley innovation centre. That campus houses their New Venture Institute, NVI, which operates as an incubator for start-up businesses. Since its inception in 2013, 232 start-ups have gone through the program, employing more than 60 people. Not all of these start-ups will succeed, but it only takes a few brilliant ideas to take off for the investment to be repaid several times over, and cuts to university funding threaten this potential. While at the NVI, I met with two women who created start-ups that are operating throughout my electorate. One of those businesses, Lateral Vision, uses virtual technology programs to deliver web based virtual tours which can be utilised for education purposes. The other business, VENYU, is a platform where people can easily search for available wedding venues using set criteria, saving time and money spent travelling to different locations, through the NVI. These two businesses are collaborating, and Lateral Vision is now providing VENYU with virtual tours of wedding locations, making it easier for couples to make wedding plans and creating a truly sustainable business. These are small examples of some of the good-news stories coming out of Australian universities, and these stories cannot happen without significant investment in our university sector.

The Tonsley campus also houses the Medical Device Partnering Program, which supports early stage innovation and technology developments for medical devices. The MDPP receives no federal government funding and only limited amounts of state government funding, and the university put their own money in, which means they have to turn away medical professionals and members of the community who come forward with great ideas—ideas that save lives and save millions of dollars in unnecessary health spending because they reduce bed stays. Even small increases in funding would lead to tangible benefits in the community. How ridiculous and how short-sighted to cut universities. How can this government claim that they support innovation when they continue to attack and hack the higher education sector?

I echo the call of the member for Griffith to reverse the MYEFO cuts to the university sector and I ask the government to undertake a comprehensive review of the post-secondary education system, with a particular emphasis on regional universities, so that a clear path forward can be forged that includes universities, vocational education and apprenticeships. Only by including all sectors can we ensure a bright, sustainable future for future generations, and a better nation.

Julian Leeser (Berowra, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

This government has a record of ensuring Australia's higher education system is economically sustainable and provides opportunities for those who are qualified to attend. It's very easy for those opposite to criticise the pragmatic pursuit of sustainable higher education funding. It was Labor who, after all, left us with a legacy of debt and deficit, so it's perhaps unsurprising that they never seriously sought to work with us to clean up their mess. Instead, all we get are motions like the one we've got today, motions that ignore some basic facts. In the face of this, I'm happy to stand here and deliver some hard truths to those opposite.

This motion accuses the government of closing the door of opportunity to thousands of Australians. It's a fiction. When Labor left government, there were approximately 1.1 million students enrolled in higher education. That number has increased today to 1.5 million. Some 400,000 more people have walked through the doors of our higher education institutions, which very much remain open despite Labor suggesting otherwise. This motion also makes the highly imaginative suggestion that orientation weeks will somehow be dominated by fear instead of festivity because of uncertainty about funding: another fabrication.

The government has been very clear about our intentions, ensuring certainty for both the sector and for students. Within the existing legislation, which was, I might add, framed by a Labor government, the coalition is maintaining Commonwealth Grant Scheme funding for bachelor degree courses at 2017 funding levels for 2018 and 2019. From 2020, increases to the Commonwealth Grant Scheme will be responsibly and sustainably linked to performance and national growth. This is not smoke and mirrors. We've set out a clear and certain funding model for future years so that the sector can plan and perform accordingly.

The member for Griffith moved this motion, and I note that last week her website pushed a petition that argues that Australian students and families should not be asked to miss out on a university education—yet another falsehood. Nobody is being asked to miss out on a university education. While the government is capping the amount of funding growth a university can access for this year and next, we are not capping the number of Commonwealth supported places that a university can provide. This means that universities can and will continue to enrol as many students in Commonwealth supported bachelor places as they choose. There are the same opportunities for students and new opportunities for university bureaucracies to get their houses in order.

Analysis by Deloitte has found that universities only use 85 per cent of their Commonwealth Grant Scheme funding, meaning that they can draw down on 15 per cent of funding they previously diverted to other purposes—like the $1.7 billion the sector spent on marketing over the past seven years. What should really concern those opposite isn't the pursuit of political pointscoring. What should concern those opposite is the security and sustainability of the system so that no student ever has to miss out. The government has faced up to the task of putting higher education costs on a responsible path for the future. We owe it not just to the students of today but to the students of tomorrow too. Australia has some of the world's leading higher education institutions and we must ensure that their cost and quality are sustainable for those future students.

Despite giving Labor and the Greens the opportunity to put the system on a sustainable basis over many years, they've been unwilling to work with the government. Labor preferred to turn a blind eye to the challenges confronting both higher education and the federal budget. Again, if I were a member of the party that presided over the fastest deterioration of Australia's debt position in modern history, I'd be happy to turn a blind eye too. I say 'tempted', because while continuing down an unsustainable path may indeed be easier politically, this government has never rejected its responsibilities to the students of today and tomorrow.

Higher education funding is at record highs of more than $17 billion annually. Coupled with this, funding for teaching and learning has increased 71 per cent since 2009. But, for all this growth, we must be focused on the outcomes, driving universities to focus on the needs of students. Coinciding with record funding growth, university completion rates have, sadly, fallen to 66 per cent, while short-term employment outcomes are down more than 10 points to 70 per cent. By linking future funding from 2020 to performance outcomes, universities will be encouraged to address these results. An incentivised funding model encourages improved performance, student retention and boosted graduate employment outcomes. The government is ensuring that students are fostered by a system that wants to produce successful and employable graduates. This will encourage universities to spend taxpayer money efficiently.

Labor proposed higher education savings of $6.6 billion in their last years of government, including an efficiency dividend. As for this government, we'll continue delivering a better budget position, better value for taxpayers and a better higher education system.

Maria Vamvakinou (Calwell, 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.