Dai Le (Fowler, Independent) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My beloved mother who recently passed told me that when she was asked, in refugee camps, where she would like to be resettled, she chose Australia, because she had heard it had the best education system in the world. So, once we were resettled, our focus was to do exceptionally well at school, with the aspiration to enter university. Many refugee and migrant families like mine, where our parents' generation didn't get the chance for higher education because of conflicts in their birth countries, place all their hopes in the future of their children and their accessibility to higher education.

I cannot emphasise how critical this is for my community of Fowler, where 14.9 per cent of my students are currently studying at university, according to the 2021 census. One constituent recently shared her university journey with me. Like me, she is a child of a refugee who escaped war-torn Vietnam. Neither of her parents finished primary education in their birth country. Her parents spoke little to no English but only hoped that she could further her education for a better future.

With enough determination, she was admitted to university to study a dual law degree, a prestigious course that would enable her to enter her dream career field. However, this was not an easy journey. Her family was not well off and this was an expensive degree, so she had to work extremely hard for it. Eventually, she was awarded a few scholarships, which helped alleviate some of the financial burden. She finished her degrees a few years ago but now has approximately $64,000 of HECS debt with the current indexation. Her first graduate job paid $50,000 inclusive of superannuation. At that time, she did not feel like her hard work was commensurate to the debt she is now in.

I share this constituent's story because it presents multiple issues with pursuing higher education: access, low-socioeconomic factors that can impact an educational trajectory and the stress of a HECS debt that follows. There is a lot of work for the government to do, to get the higher education system to be at its optimum for Australia. It is a privilege to go on to higher education in Australia and to pursue your passion, because not everyone has equal access to higher education, due to cultural, social and economic factors that hinder their rights.

I acknowledge the Minister for Education for introducing this bill, as part of reforming higher education, to prepare the Australian Universities Accordinterim report. This report reveals key findings on the future of higher education for Australia and is an important initiative. It predicts that 90 per cent of jobs created over the next five years will require post-secondary education and a 50 per cent higher qualification. This means that our country must be well equipped to cater to this rising demand. Higher education is a vital part, alongside the trades industry, of making Australia's future a prosperous one.

One of the priority actions that came out of theinterim report was for universities to establish hubs in regional and outer metropolitan areas, to target disadvantaged students. With just 15 per cent of my constituents currently holding a university degree as the highest level of education, compared to the rest of Australia at 26 per cent, this concept of a university hub in an area like south-west Sydney is an exciting project.

I acknowledge the recent launch of the Western Sydney University's Fairfield clinic, this weekend, in my neighbouring electorate of McMahon. The concept is for a technology enabled space, to give students and the broader community an environment to study in and cultivate their knowledge. My understanding is that the hub is to also include an academic program for high achievers and pathway programs for school leavers. I hope this will provide further accessibility for students who are unable to access the critical resources for universities at home. I know that with the rising costs of living students may be finding it harder to travel, to pay for train tickets or fuel to get to their classes.

It's important to have a university presence, to promote itself for future generations, but I must remind the minister and the government that it must also be fit for purpose for all students. If a student attending Western Sydney University is struggling with their studies, what will this hub be able to do and what support will be given to secure their university journey? Will students in courses that require specialised software, such as digital design or media, be able to access these programs so that they don't have to pay out of pocket to use them? Will students be able to have face-to-face engagements with educators, support workers and other critical services to ensure they are still part of the university community and not working in isolation from the main campus?

I hope this will not essentially be just a centre with tables and computers and that substantial support will be provided in these proposed spaces. It's my understanding that this project is due to be completed in 2024, and I look forward to visiting it when it's completed. I will hold the government to account, to ensure this critical infrastructure is developed and is fit for purpose.

The bill also incorporates priority action 2, which recommends ceasing the 50 per cent pass requirement of a student's first eight units of their bachelor's degree to continue as a Commonwealth supported student and to be eligible for FEE-HELP assistance. In lieu, the focus will be directed towards increasing reporting on student progress. The goal of this is to eliminate disproportionate disadvantages of students from low-socioeconomic backgrounds. I support and welcome this change.

A 50 per cent mark may be perceived as the bare minimum to pass a course, but the reality is that there may be numerous factors that can prevent a student from reaching this mark. For example, I had a constituent share that during his time at university he juggled part-time work at McDonald's but was often assigned night-to-breakfast shifts, which made it hard for him to prioritise study as he was constantly fatigued. This resulted in him failing a first-year core course of his bachelor degree. He eventually quit his part-time job to salvage his degree. Students should not have to choose between earning money to get by day to day and furthering their education. We live in a society now where a 50 per cent mark shouldn't stop students from achieving their aspirations.

We as a government need to ensure that the higher education system can provide adequate support to students. I understand that part 2 of the bill seeks to address this by requiring higher education providers to have a policy which deals with support for students to assist them to successfully complete their units of study for courses that they are enrolled in. A higher education provider is required to comply with their support for students policy and report to the minister about their compliance, and failing to do so will attract a civil penalty of 60 penalty units. By making it mandatory for higher education providers to have a support for students policy, this will ensure disadvantaged students' interests are at the forefront and they aren't left behind in their studies.

However, I would like to draw attention to a critical point raised in the interim report. It states:

New ideas must be explored to prevent excessive debt and rising student cost of living pressures from discouraging people of all ages from pursuing higher education and completing their qualifications.

I remind the government that at present students are still battling their HECS debt and the indexation that follows, which currently sits at 7.1 per cent, the highest it has been; for the last 10 years it has never exceeded four per cent. The interim report notes that this is important, as excessive debt can deter prospective students from pursuing higher education when they can earn immediate money working other jobs. This is especially crippling for students who are from low-socioeconomic backgrounds and are unable to pay their HECS debt as it continues to grow with an excessive indexation rate.

If we are encouraging students to obtain higher education for the good of Australia's future and to support their aspirations, we must take a step back and consider the financial inequities of higher education. The reality in my electorate is that students are disadvantaged and often concurrently studying and working to make ends meet, like the story of a constituent I shared earlier. With the interim report suggesting that new ideas be explored, we must do something regarding the HECS-HELP indexation, as we are essentially charging students interest rates to be able to study—money which they don't have.

Recently, I called on the government to temporarily revert the indexation rate to the previous year's rate of 3.9 per cent for at least three years so that students can have an opportunity to gain stable employment and save to pay their HECS. This option should still be on the cards if we are to provide better equity and opportunity to students. While we cannot revert to the Whitlam era days of completely removing university fees, we should still consider measures to encourage students to obtain higher education for the good of Australia's future and to support their aspirations. We must take a step back and consider the financial inequities they may face currently. The reality in my electorate is that students are disadvantaged.

I understand that the government is committed to extending the Higher Education Continuity Guarantee into 2024 and 2025, consistent with the recommendation of priority action 4. Higher education providers should be required to direct funding from this guarantee to achieve greater equity outcomes. Specifically, the funding should be allocated to create policies that provide support for students' outcomes, scholarships and equity related services. After all, if the government is prepared to spend $368 billion in building eight nuclear submarines, then surely the education of future generations of this country should have the same value consideration. How are we to be a clever country if we don't invest in our young people? We keep on saying they are our future. If so, then the government should put their money where their mouth is.

I acknowledge that the minister is taking steps to address the inequity in our educational system and is looking at ways to give underrepresented students fair and equitable access. I would urge him and the government to start with HECS debt indexation, which would have immediate an impact for students currently studying and those planning to do so in the future.

Carina Garland (Chisholm, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The bill before the House, the Higher Education Support Amendment (Response to the Australian Universities Accord Interim Report) Bill 2023, is really important. It is really significant to my electorate of Chisholm, which has two universities. There has been so much interest in the work of the Australian Universities Accord. We did a local survey in Chisholm and received over 400 responses. Higher education is a really significant issue. I'm really pleased that our government is undertaking this reform process so as to ensure that we have the best university system that we possibly can.

The Australian government has committed to the Australian Universities Accord in order to drive a lasting and transformative reform in Australia's higher education system. This really is an incredible opportunity to build a visionary plan for Australia's universities and higher education sector. In November last year the Minister for Education, Jason Clare, appointed Professor Mary O'Kane to lead the biggest and broadest review of Australia's higher education system in 15 years. The accord panel, led by Professor O'Kane, brought together experience from a wide range of places—the university sector, the business sector and experts in public policy. The combined experience of the panel from across STEM and the humanities, from our cities and regions and from across the political divide has informed the interim report, whose recommendations form the basis of this bill.

The objective of the accord is to devise recommendations and performance targets that will improve the quality, accessibility, affordability and sustainability of higher education in order to achieve long-term security and prosperity for the sector and the nation. The minister has also tasked the accord panel with looking at how higher education and vocational education and training can and should work more closely together. I've had conversations locally with vice-chancellors and directors of local TAFEs about this very issue, amongst others. Our government has invested $2.7 million over two years to deliver the Australian Universities Accord. This is a really exciting process and opportunity for our nation in order to open the door of opportunity for more Australians to go to university.

Three weeks ago the interim report, from which the items in this bill were drawn as recommendations, was released. This is an important first step. I note also that in the interim report a range of questions and issues were raised by the expert panel with an invitation for people right across Australia to make their own submissions, which close on 1 September. I know that people in my electorate, certainly, are taking advantage of that. This is a really consultative process which really demonstrates the seriousness with which our government is approaching the necessary reforms to a higher education sector.

We read in the report that in the decades ahead more jobs will require a university qualification, so we need to make sure that more people are able to access university in order for them to be able to secure those jobs of the future. What the accord team has suggested and the minister has reiterated is that, in order to significantly boost the percentage of the workforce with a university qualification, we need to significantly increase the number of students from cohorts that are currently underrepresented in our universities—that is, students from the outer suburbs of our cities, students from the regions, students from low socioeconomic status backgrounds, students with a disability and Indigenous students.

The risk of not significantly increasing the number of students from these groups will result in a shortage of the skills we need for Australia to take advantage of the decades ahead. It will also mean that we won't have an equal society where everybody is able to aspire to the opportunity of a university education and the good, secure, well-paid jobs that come with that. Without a skilled workforce, we leave opportunity on the table.

The report is set out in two parts. The first part sets out priorities for immediate action. By standing in the House today, we are taking that immediate action by implementing those recommendations. In the first part of the report, five recommendations set out our priorities for immediate action: we are taking action by creating more university study hubs, not only in the regions but also in our outer suburbs; we are scrapping the 50 per cent pass rule and requiring better reporting on how students are progressing; we are extending the demand driven funding currently provided to Indigenous students from regional and remote areas to cover all Indigenous students so that Indigenous students from the cities as well as from the regions are able to get a place in university if they meet the criteria for entry; we are providing funding certainty during this accord process by extending the Higher Education Continuity Guarantee into 2024 and 25, with funding arrangements that prioritise support for equity students; and we're also working with state and territory governments, through national cabinet, to improve university governance.

I was especially pleased to see the response yesterday from Minister Clare around the importance of improving student safety on campuses and convening a working group to be responsible for helping us navigate work in this important area. We need to make sure that universities are good employers and provide a supportive workplace and a workplace where staff can have confidence that they will not be underpaid for the important work they do.

We need to make sure that governing bodies have the right expertise, including in the business of running universities and—going back to the safety issue—making sure campuses are safe. Alarmingly, we know from the National Student Safety Survey that one in 20 students has been sexually assaulted since starting university and that one in six has been sexually harassed. These figures are awful. They show just how widespread this issue of unsafe campuses is in this country and the need for us as a government to take urgent action in partnership with advocates, students and universities, alongside states and territories.

The actions that universities have taken to address this have clearly not been good enough. We have the research and evidence and know the scope of the problem. I myself know from archival research in my former career as an academic that students not being safe on campuses is something that has been reported for many decades, and little action has been taken. We're really at a very significant moment in history where we are finally listening as a nation and taking action to make sure that students are safe on campus.

I was so pleased to hear the minister's statement in the House yesterday regarding this issue and the appointment of Patty Kinnersly, the CEO of Our Watch, who will be part of the process to take meaningful action in this area as part of the working group. The first meeting of that working group is slated for next week. It will consult with groups like their STOP, End Rape on Campus and Fair Agenda. I've met with some of those groups and will continue to meet with them. With two university campuses in my electorate, I have spoken to students on campuses and know just how important this issue is. This is an area we have to finally get right. Unfortunately, during my undergraduate and postgraduate studies, I witnessed and experienced some of the things we need to ensure don't happen. I've watched people disconnect with study as a result of experiencing sexual violence on campus, and it's very devastating to think about all of those bright futures that aren't able to be realised because of the assaults, the abuse that happened to them on campus, and the academic careers that were cut too short.

There is clearly more to be done to ensure that we have a consistent model around reporting sexual violence and that the problem can be tackled in a comprehensive and consistent manner across Australian campuses. Our government is ambitious in pursuing a safer country for all, and we have made that clear in a number of ways, including in our National Plan to End Violence Against Women and Children, which seeks to eliminate gender-based violence in one generation. That is a very ambitious goal, but it is a goal that we must aim for. Improving safety on campus and engaging educational institutions is a vital part of achieving that goal. As someone who has spent significant time within the higher education sector as both a student and an academic, I stand here as a passionate advocate for the sector, particularly with the number of students and academics that live in my electorate and the campuses in my electorate.

I was really pleased to see that in response to recommendation 2 of the accord interim report, the recommendation to remove the requirement that students pass 50 per cent of the units they study to remain eligible for a Commonwealth-supported place when FEE-HELP assistance is there. The former government introduced this rule is part of its Job-ready Graduates Package, which still necessitates some examination, and it has seen a disproportionate number of students from low socioeconomic backgrounds being forced to leave university. This bill requires universities and other providers to have a dedicated plan in place—a support for students policy, essentially—under which they will be required to proactively identify students who are at risk of falling behind and set out what they will do to help them succeed. We are putting forward a plan here to make sure people don't drop out, that they don't fail, that they don't get left behind, but where we can help people stay in university and improve retention rates and completion rates, particularly from the students from more disadvantaged backgrounds. Under the current arrangements, students are required to pass at least 50 per cent of the units they study to continue eligibility for Commonwealth assistance. This pass rate is assessed after they have completed eight units of a bachelor degree or higher, or four units of a shorter one.

As mentioned, the students who fail more than half their subjects currently lose eligibility for Commonwealth assistance. Those pass rate requirements were originally introduced in January 2022 by the former coalition government as part of the Job-ready Graduates Program. I think it was designed to dissuade students from continuing in courses they were not academically suited for, but the impact has really been disproportionate for students from First Nations, low socioeconomic backgrounds, and other underrepresented cohorts or disadvantaged cohorts. This recommendation has been welcomed by the higher education sector, who don't want to see students fail—they want to see improved equity and to see students succeed.

More than 13,000 students at 27 universities have already been hit by this rule—that's 13,000 students who are potentially now disengaged from the higher education system. The practical effect of these measures has been really punitive for students, and we should be helping students to succeed, not forcing them to quit their degrees. Universities right across the country have called for the removal of this rule. Helping students to succeed is now going to be the focus of this government's higher education policy, rather than forcing students to quit, which was the policy under the previous government.

This measure also directly supports efforts towards achieving Closing the Gap outcome 6, to increase the proportion of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people aged 25-34 years who have completed a tertiary qualification to 70 per cent by 2031. One of the other important element of this bill looks to increase First Nations enrolment numbers through the expansion of the eligibility of demand-driven funding. We will now include First Nations students who are living in metropolitan areas in Australia to study bachelor and bachelor-honours courses. This means, effectively, that there is no cap on the numbers of First Nations students that can enrol in Commonwealth-supported places. The Department of Education has estimated that this may in fact double the number of Indigenous students at university within a decade, which is quite remarkable. This measure builds on our government's election commitment to deliver up to 20,000 Commonwealth supported places and fee-free TAFE. Again, this is a measure that has strong support from the sector.

This bill and the recommendations outlined in the interim report represent a landmark moment for higher education and for our nation. It's a pivotal step to ensuring the continued excellence, accessibility and sustainability of Australian universities. Our universities have long been the bedrock of innovation, research and the cultivation of young minds. This bill responds to the concerns raised in the interim report with a comprehensive approach that will not only address existing problems but also lay the foundation for a brighter, better educational future for Australia. I commend the bill to the House.

Kate Chaney (Curtin, Independent) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I welcome the two amendments to the Higher Education Support Act laid out in the Higher Education Support Amendment (Response to the Australian Universities Accord Interim Report) Bill 2023. They represent significant and positive changes to shift us closer to the goal of greater equity and access to higher education.

As noted in the interim report to the Australian Universities Accord review, the ongoing process of this review has served to reiterate how critical and transformative higher education is. Higher education is essential for the social and economic wellbeing of individuals but also to Australia as a whole, and particularly to our future growth and productivity. The review urges us to prioritise both the quality of higher education and access to it in Australia to meet the multiple challenges ahead and to deliver the skills we currently require and will require in the future. I'm particularly glad to see the 30-year time frame being considered in this review. We see far too little long-term thinking in policy development, and with education it can take decades to truly see the impact of policy changes.

The University of Western Australia is in my electorate of Curtin. It's rated as a world top 100 university. It's part of the Group of Eight group of universities and is No. 1 in WA for graduate employability. I studied at UWA from 1992 to 1997, and I'm pleased to report that many aspects of the vibrant student life I remember from my time there continue to this day. I note that both UWA and the UWA Student Guild made submissions to the O'Kane review, which I support.

The first amendment in this bill is a simple but important one. It will now extend and guarantee eligibility to all Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander students for a funded place at university. The practical impact of this amendment is to extend the guaranteed funding for students in remote and regional areas to students in metropolitan areas too. This amendment is necessary if we're to reach our ambitious Closing the gap report target of 70 per cent of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander young adults with a tertiary education by 2031. These amendments may also have a positive impact on broader First Nations families and communities, as well as individuals, embedding generational accessibility to tertiary education.

The second amendment proposes to remove the 50 per cent pass rule, which requires students to pass 50 per cent of their first eight units to maintain their Commonwealth supported place and other fee assistance. Like many submissions to the review, the student guild from Curtin University in Western Australia argued that the 50 per cent completion rate introduced in the Job-ready Graduates Package was flawed. It urged the review to consider the different reasons why students fail and, instead, provide universities with a discretion to look at individual circumstances instead of being forced to adopt a one-size-fits-all approach. Equity groups, including Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander students, students from lower socio-economic backgrounds and students with disability, are likely to have more challenges transitioning to university and are disproportionately impacted by this rule. The Curtin Student Guild suggests money is better spent on providing support to students who may be at risk rather than the increased administration requiring universities to report on students who have not met the threshold of passed units.

The University of Western Australia also urged consideration of the context of a student where there is little or no family history of tertiary education, and the impact of a punitive approach with the requirement to pass more than 50 per cent of the first eight units or lose the CSP and HELP loan. They noted that the pass rule ignores the enormous cultural and physical barriers to successful participation among non-traditional students and that some success in university can be a springboard to the success of others in the family or indeed to later personal success. Minister Clare tells us that more than 13,000 students at 27 universities in Australia—students who are mostly from disadvantaged backgrounds—have already been impacted by the 50 per cent pass rule in the two years since the job-ready package was implemented.

In my experience, first-year students don't always make foolproof judgements about their choice of subjects. This would equally apply for students with added disadvantages, who may not have had family members with university experience to guide and support them in their subject choices. For those who have a low completion rate and who lose their CSP, it's likely that they'll pull out of university rather than continue to create more debt. Obviously, they are, and should be, liable to pay for the units they've failed, but the overall result is that they will withdraw altogether rather than remain at university without a Commonwealth supported place. So the 50 per cent rule does not, as the former minister for education, Mr Tehan, suggested it would, protect students from racking up debt. Rather, it presents an additional burden over the heads of disadvantaged and undersupported students. I support its removal.

I commend the amendments that require all higher education providers to have a support-for-students policy that complies with the Higher Education Provider Guidelines—namely, to require institutions to not only identify students at risk of not completing their units of study but provide support to those students and to account to the Minister for Education for the execution of that policy and support. I'm optimistic about these amendments and the focus on strategies aimed at supporting at-risk students to continue with and complete their education, but there needs to be some rigour related to this support. The Department of Education must continue to listen to student representative bodies and higher education institutions to enable them to deliver effective and tangible support to students who are facing challenges.

I commend the minister for acting quickly upon these two priority actions of the Universities Accord review interim report and I look forward to further detailed consideration by the Department of Education and the minister of the 82 policy areas identified by that report for improvement.

Susan Templeman (Macquarie, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

It's always a privilege to speak about the things that we are doing to improve the quality of university education that Australian students access and to expand that access to other students, which is what this bill is focused on.

The Higher Education Support Amendment (Response to the Australian Universities Accord Interim Report) Bill 2023 comes in response to the interim report of the team looking at how we improve our university system. This is not the end of the story; this is the start of the story. That team is comprised of a really skilled group of people. I think it's important to know that it has academics, like Professor Mary O'Kane, the chair of the panel, who is the former vice-chancellor of the University of Adelaide, and the Western Sydney University vice-chancellor, Professor Barney Glover, who is bringing lived experience of what happens in the part of the continent that my community in greater Western Sydney are familiar with. Also on that panel who are considering, at the request of the minister, some recommendations is the CEO of Macquarie Bank. I have known Shemara for a long time and I have a huge regard for her. I also think it's really important that we have business leaders involved in these discussions—that the review does involve a wider group of people reflecting on what makes a difference in our universities producing graduates and supporting students for the 21st century. We've also got the Hon. Jenny Macklin, who is of course well known to this place, along with Professor Larissa Behrendt and the Hon. Fiona Nash. So there is huge diversity.

I want to stress that because it's important for people to know how wide the net is, in terms of drawing on expertise. It's also important to know that this group is asking for everybody's feedback, on the ideas it's come up with, and between now and the end of the year there is opportunity to look at what's being floated as ideas. There are something like 70 different ideas that have been put forward. If anyone needs those links, I'll make sure I make them available, when I post this speech on my Facebook page, so that people know how to access the appropriate page, so they can give feedback. That's because this is not something that we want to come up with in a vacuum. We want to draw on all that expertise. We're really committed to opening the door of opportunity for more Australians to go to university.

Part of that means that we act on the priorities put in the interim report. There were five priorities that were things we could do almost immediately. One is that we create more university study hubs, not just in the regions but in outer suburbs. I'll talk a bit more about that one shortly. Another is that we scrap the 50 per cent pass rule; that is within this legislation. The third is that we extend the demand-driven funding, that is currently provided to Indigenous students from regional and remote areas, and make it cover all Indigenous students. That includes those in the Blue Mountains and the Hawkesbury in the electorate of Macquarie that I represent. Again, that is included in this bill. Another is that we provide funding certainty during the accord process by extending the Higher Education Continuity Guarantee into 2024 and 2025 with funding arrangements that prioritise support for equity students. The final priority is that we work with states and territories to improve university governance. They're the initial steps we're taking as part of the response to the interim report.

I want to talk specifically about the ones that are in this piece of legislation. Let's talk about the 50 per cent pass rule. I have had comments such as, 'Of course students should pass; they should at least pass their first year of university subjects.' The way it works now, students are required to pass at least 50 per cent of the units of study they undertake to even be eligible for Commonwealth assistance. The pass rate is assessed after they have completed eight units in a bachelor degree or higher or four units in a shorter course.

Students who fail more than half currently lose all eligibility for Commonwealth access and assistance. The pass rate requirements were originally introduced, in January 2022, by the former coalition government as part of its job-ready graduates program. Essentially, it was to dissuade students from continuing in courses that they're not academically suited for. But the practical effect of those measures has been extremely punitive for some students. The impact of the pass rate requirements has disproportionately affected students from certain groups: First Nations, those with low-socioeconomic status, those who are first in family to university and those other under-represented or educationally disadvantaged cohorts.

I would hope that wasn't the intended consequence of the rules that were brought in, but that's what we're seeing and we can't let that remain. More than 13,000 students at 27 universities have been hit by this rule. The removal of the rule has been called for by universities right across the country, everywhere from Adelaide to Sydney to the Sunshine Coast, including my own neck of the woods, Western Sydney University. We should be helping students succeed at university, not penalising them and forcing them to quit.

I know, from firsthand experience, that the first year of university can be a real challenge for some students. I have spoken in this place previously of a student I supported through her university. I remember saying to Ellie, who has now completed her PhD and is waiting for that to be assessed—many, many years later—'First year is meant to be hard! It's teaching your brain to think about things in a different way than you did in high school.' And it is meant to be hard. But it is not ideal to know that there is this pass or fail rule where you're out if you don't manage to get your head around it in that first year and in those first subjects. I'm really pleased to see that we are taking an attitude that we support students to help them succeed, not force them to quit.

This bill brings in requirements on universities and other providers to have policies in place to help students successfully complete their studies. The universities and other providers will be required to show us how they'll identify students who are struggling and how they'll connect those students with support services. The Department of Education will issue a discussion paper to consult with the universities on the content of these policies.

The policies are expected to contain things like: a process for identifying students who need help; how to assess a student's academic and non-academic suitability for continuing study, particularly when an alert has been triggered; the connecting of students to support before the census date whenever possible; and providing sufficient non-academic support for students, such as financial assistance, housing information and mental health supports. That's important as many students struggle because of non-academic reasons. If we can address those issues, they will have a greater chance of success.

We also want universities to have appropriate crisis and critical harm response arrangements as well as providing access to trained academic development advisers who can really help a student identify what is holding them back and come up with a really tailored response for that student, because it's not going to be a one size fits all. We want to ensure that the academic and non-academic supports are age appropriate and culturally appropriate, including specific arrangements for Indigenous students.

We also expect universities to offer special circumstances arrangements proactively, where the provider is aware of a significant life event for a student, as well as targeted individual literacy and numeracy supports, peer support and in core support from academic staff. That is a really key part of this. We're not just saying, 'Let's drop that rule,' we're saying, 'Let's put in more supports so that it shouldn't even be necessary.'

The other part that we're legislating, in this piece of work, is to extend the demand-driven places to metropolitan Indigenous students that currently are not given to metropolitan Indigenous students but are given to rural and regional Indigenous students. I want to be clear. In the Blue Mountains and Hawkesbury we don't qualify for rural or regional, even though it can take a huge commute of several hours on public transport—that's if you can access public transport—to get to a university. So there are many barriers already, and the barrier we can remove is around the competition for places.

The existing demand-driven measure was implemented in 2021. This proposal aims to increase First Nations enrolment numbers by expanding the eligibility of demand-driven funding to include all metropolitan First Nations students studying bachelor and bachelor honours courses except courses of study in medicine. This measure directly supports efforts to achieve Closing the Gap outcome 6. That measure is aimed at increasing the proportion of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people, between the age of 25 and 34 years, who've completed a tertiary qualification of certificate III or above to 70 per cent by 2031. This means no cap on the number of First Nations students who can enrol in Commonwealth supported places. That is going to be a really important step. Western Sydney University is one of those universities where there is strong support for this measure.

While I am speaking about Western Sydney University, I want to go to one of the other interim recommendations, which is to have more university study hubs. I note that Western Sydney University has already opened a study hub in Western Sydney in the Fairfield region. Speaking at that, Professor Barney Glover, who is the vice-chancellor, described what it was going to be. He said:

It will be as high tech and as advanced as the facilities that we've put in very recently to Bankstown, where we have an enormous new campus in the heart of Bankstown.

I think that's really key. These study hubs have the capacity to operate as a mini campus. It's really important for people to be able to access university close to where they live. It does take away one of those barriers. We are very lucky to have the Hawkesbury campus, but it doesn't mean that everything is offered there. I really look forward to working with universities to expand the access we give to people.

It's also really opportune to mention the investment that we are making in the Western Sydney University Hawkesbury campus around our agritech hub. Labor is providing nearly $17 million to the university to really boost the jobs, skills and agriculture research that happens there. These are the sorts of things our universities do, particularly somewhere like Hawkesbury. We are doing real, practical stuff. The funding will expand the glasshouses where experiments are going on to see what can be grown with very little water and nutrients in the most efficient way possible. I'm really proud that we're going to be investing significantly in that campus to expand the work that's happening, which will support the agricultural sector not only in and around the Hawkesbury but right across the country.

There is no doubt there are opportunities for reforming universities. In my last few moments, I would like to reference the work that's been done to increase safety on campuses. Being safe on campus is something students have raised as their No. 1 issue. We're really committed to doing that. The working group that has been put together will be looking closely at what can be done. This is not something that universities have been able to address. They have made a lot of commitments to addressing it, but it does need us as the federal government to take a leadership role and support them to ensure they create very safe places for every student on campus. That's one of the fundamentals of a strong university sector. I commend this bill to the House.

Sophie Scamps (Mackellar, Independent) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise in support of the government's Higher Education Support Amendment (Response to the Australian Universities Accord Interim Report) Bill 2023. I have come to this place to represent the constituents of my electorate of Mackellar, and in doing so I represent all constituents of all ages, and of course that includes young people—people for whom this bill will have the most impact.

University higher education has always been enormously important to my family. In the 1930s my grandmother, then Dorothy Arnott, was the second woman ever to graduate from veterinary science at Sydney University. I have also been extremely fortunate to benefit from Australia's world-class tertiary education system. However, I recognise the immense privilege it is to be able to undertake tertiary education. I also believe it must never be something that is only available to the privileged, and so I support this bill as it builds greater inclusivity and equity into our higher education system.

Tertiary education provides an unparalleled opportunity for personal enrichment and is an invaluable investment in the future of our nation, so it is incumbent upon us here in this place to ensure that our universities remain relevant, robust and respected institutions for future generations. Most importantly, we must ensure they are accessible for people of all backgrounds and all walks of life. That's what this bill seeks to do. With the bill, the government seeks to implement two of the most pressing interim recommendations of the Australian Universities Accord. The Australian Universities Accord is the review that has been undertaken to ensure that Australia's tertiary education system is fit for the demands of the 21st century.

Young people in 2023 are facing extraordinary challenges. Intergenerational inequality is real, and it is increasing. Cost-of-living pressures are hurting them more as inflation kicks in, including the booming cost of renting and ballooning HECS debts. Add to that the uncertain future of a world facing climate breakdown. Higher education is a critical area where we in this House must build policy that supports and gives a leg-up to our young people. Our higher education system must not only meet the needs of the nation and the future workforce; it must also meet the needs of the people in the system—the students, the academics and the support staff. To that end, it must be inclusive, relevant, supportive and of a quality that is equal to anything anywhere else in the world. Campuses must also be safe places for our young people to study and socialise.

In November 2022 the Minister for Education, to his great credit, commissioned a 12-month review into Australia's higher education system, led by a panel of eminent Australians—the Australian Universities Accord. The minister's stated objective of this review is to improve the quality, accessibility, affordability and sustainability of higher education in order to achieve long-term security and prosperity for the sector and the nation. These are noble aims. During this process the minister has ensured that the crossbench has been kept up to date on progress of the accord, and I'd like to thank him for that.

This week the minister has also arranged for the crossbench to be briefed by Emerita Professor Mary O'Kane, chair of the panel. These briefings are extremely helpful, and the collaborative approach of the minister on such a critical issue is indeed appreciated and respected. It has been wonderful to hear from Professor O'Kane, who has led a panel who so ardently believe in the benefits of higher education to individuals, to society and to the nation. To quote the panel:

… a high-quality and equitable higher education system is now a must-have for Australia and there can be no room for complacency. To successfully tackle our big national priorities, including lifting economic productivity, making a clean energy transition, building a caring society, meeting the defence and security challenges of our region, and strengthening our democratic culture, our higher education system must become much, much stronger.

The interim report of the Universities Accord was released last month. That report called for five modest and sensible priority actions to be considered immediately. This bill, less than a month later, seeks to implement two of these priority recommendations. It also lists a number of larger-scale issues for further policy consideration which will be dealt with in more detail in the final report, to be handed down in December this year.

I'd like to comment on a few of the accord's priority recommendations today. The first is one of the recommended priority actions being addressed in this bill: the urgent recommendation that the 50 per cent pass rule be abolished. Given its detrimental impact on equality, as it disproportionately affects students from more-disadvantaged backgrounds, I fully support this move. Most of the students affected by this rule have been from underrepresented groups, including First Nations students, who are around twice as likely to be affected as other students. The rule requires that students pass 50 per cent of their units of study in order to continue to be eligible for Commonwealth assistance for their fees. Of course, without that assistance, very few students would be able to afford to continue university. However, the early years of university, as many of us know, are a time of immense change and challenge and can be incredibly stressful. The pressure of living away from home, cost of living, health issues, work demands, study demands and new-relationship demands are just some of the many reasons young people may struggle to achieve in the early years of university. To cut off a young person's dreams in this way is simply not fair. With this bill, the government will, rightly, remove this harsh and arbitrary rule.

At the same time, the government has promised increased intervention and support and reporting on student progress, the idea being to help them when they're struggling rather than to kick them out. Again, this is a sensible and practical investment in our young people.

As I explained earlier, starting university can involve significant adjustment stress for students, especially those from lower socioeconomic backgrounds who have never been in an environment like university before and who don't have the family financial resources to fall back on. These are the very students whose participation in tertiary education we should be fostering, rather than impeding.

In a similar vein, the report identifies as its third priority action that all First Nations students must be eligible for a funded place at university. In other words: despite any caps on the number of students who can ordinarily be accepted for a course, all First Nations students who achieve the necessary grades will be given a place. This guarantee already applies to regional- and remote-area First Nations students but not metropolitan ones—and it must. University will not be free for these students. They will still be part of the HECS-HELP system, and it will not adversely affect any other students because it is in addition to current arrangements.

We know that higher education outcomes are fundamental to closing the gap. The Uluru Statement from the Heart contains the aspiration that First Nations children 'will walk in two worlds' and that 'their culture will be a gift to their country'. The gap that exists in First Nations tertiary attainment needs to be closed. This is one step towards that aim.

Another priority action that the interim report has identified is to improve university governance. When the interim report talks about governance, the basic idea is that higher education institutions need to be better, safer places to work and to learn. To make higher education institutions better places to work, they need greater funding security. Because of funding insecurity, many universities are only able to offer short-term contracts and rely on a highly casualised workforce. This is just not good enough. Our academics have dedicated their lives to the pursuit and handing down of knowledge. With their qualifications, many, if not most, could have had much higher paying and more stable careers in other industries. Despite this, they remain committed to research, to knowledge-building, to educating and to bettering our society.

As the report states, 'The funding of higher education and its workforce structure are inextricably linked.' Workforce instability in the sector threatens the quality of our institutions, and, as in other sectors, the casualisation of the roles disproportionately affects women. Particularly appalling was the treatment that our university staff, our brains trust, received during the pandemic by the former government. Thousands of academics and other university support staff were forced to leave the sector during that difficult time because JobKeeper was not extended to them as it was to the vast majority of the country's workforce. The Fair Work Ombudsman considers that these issues causing workforce instability are entrenched in the sector. I look forward to the solutions the panel proposes in dealing with this critical issue in its final report.

The safety of students and the duty of care universities owe to them is also considered by the panel to be an aspect of good governance. We know that safety on campus is an issue that has not been adequately addressed. The 2021 National Student Safety Survey found that 16 per cent of students have experienced harassment and five per cent have been sexually assaulted. If you think about that—about our daughters and their friends going off to university— out of a group of 20, at least one has been sexually assaulted on campus.

Just last week, a group of brave women came to parliament to share their stories of sexual assault on campus, and they also shared their stories of the lack of care and support provided to them by many of the universities. It's unacceptable that these women feel they have no choice but to come to this place and reshare their experience of sexual violence to reopen that trauma in order for governments and universities to listen and act. Why is it always the survivor's job?

The interim report recommends, and the government has committed to, engaging with state and territory governments to improve student and staff safety. I very much look forward to hearing more about how the government will approach this issue.

In conclusion, I applaud the work already done by Australian Universities Accord panel and the work they have signalled they will move onto. To anyone interested in higher education in this country who believes in its transformative power, I commend the report to you. For a report prepared by a government-commissioned panel, it is genuinely good reading, no doubt reflective of the quality of the academics responsible for it. I will end by sharing one sentiment from the report, which elegantly summarises the place of tertiary education in our lives:

We live in an era of profound intellectual, technological, economic and cultural change, in which complacency is dangerous and our egalitarian values need to be defended and renewed. In this environment, higher education is our best asset. It transforms lives and underpins our nation's wellbeing and security. It delivers education, research, community engagement and industrial capability. It powers social mobility, economic prosperity, security, creativity and innovation. It helps us understand the central place of First Nations people in our history—through the generous sharing of their knowledge, language, culture and sense of community and place. Higher education does all this and more by creating new knowledge, dispersing it widely and applying it to the many welcome and unwelcome challenges that confront us.

Emma McBride (Dobell, Australian Labor Party, Assistant Minister for Mental Health and Suicide Prevention) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

It has been said before, but it is well and truly worth saying again: education can be a great leveller. It has the potential to lift individuals and communities and give them the very best chance. In my family it changed everything. My late father, Grant, was the first in his family to go to university; with the help of a scholarship he juggled three jobs whilst studying part time and parenting. He graduated as a civil structural engineer. His belief in the change that education and, in particular, technical training can make led him to an early career teaching at TAFE. Every kid deserves the opportunity that my dad had, wherever they grow up—in Dundas Valley or Wyong.

I am proud to be part of a government that's making post-school education a reality for many people and families from disadvantaged backgrounds, with more Commonwealth-supported university places and hundreds and thousands of more places for fee-free TAFE. There are 480,000 places. My five brothers and my sister are now physicists, plumbers, sociologists, statisticians, business analysts and lawyers—all because of the chance of my father's and mother's education. Under the last government, that chance was slipping away for too many kids, especially those growing up in the outer suburbs and regions. As it currently stands in Dobell, 15 per cent of adults have a bachelor's degree or higher diploma. It's probably not dissimilar in the neighbouring seat that my colleague and friend, Minister Pat Conroy, represents.

Pat Conroy (Shortland, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Defence Industry) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Hear, hear!

Emma McBride (Dobell, Australian Labor Party, Assistant Minister for Mental Health and Suicide Prevention) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

In the entirety of New South Wales, it sits at around 30 per cent. That's twice as high as in communities like ours. The Higher Education Support Amendment (Response to the Australian Universities Accord Interim Report) Bill 2023 is especially important for communities that I represent and that Minister Conroy and Dr Reid in Robertson on the Central Coast of New South Wales represent.

On the Central Coast we have the University of Newcastle. We've got campuses in Gosford and Ourimbah. People who attend university in my community are often juggling work, study, commuting and family commitments. Compared to other communities, they are more likely to come through an enabling program, like Yapug and Open Foundation, than directly from school. In fact, 30 per cent of commencing students at Ourimbah come through enabling programs, and the University of Newcastle has always had a focus firmly on equity and excellence. That makes it all the more important for a region like the Central Coast and the outer suburbs and regions around Australia. We need to do better at creating opportunities in our regions and our outer suburbs, like the Central Coast, with pathways to higher education and better support for students when they get there at whatever age or whatever time of life.

In my capacity as Assistant Minister for Rural and Regional Health, the education divide between the city and the bush is clear, and it plays out in peoples' lives and in their health, quality of life and life expectancy. As Minister Clare has said time and again, in the regions only 13 per cent of people have a university degree in Australia today. As I mentioned, that rate of higher education is reflected in their health care and that of their communities.

Recently, the Royal Flying Doctor Service released the Best for the bush, rural and remote health base line 2022 report. It showed that women living in the most remote parts of Australia are likely to die 19 years sooner than their city counterparts. It also found that those living in very remote areas are almost three times more likely to be hospitalised. This government's challenge—and my challenge as the assistant minister assisting Minister Mark Butler for rural and regional health—is to help turn this around. We need to turn this around. Our communities are relying on us to make this change. These regions are calling out for more GPs, nurses, dieticians, podiatrists and psychologists, just to name a few. But all of those jobs require degrees. We know that the best way to have health workers and health practitioners in the bush and in the outer suburbs is to train them there. The reality is that health professionals educated in Camperdown aren't moving to Condobolin, and this needs to change.

The recommendation of the Australian Universities Accord interim report, led by Professor Mary O'Kane and released by the minister last month, makes that very plain. I was pleased to see that one such recommendation was to create more university study hubs in the regions and in the outer suburbs. This is absolutely critical reform. Our government has committed to doing just that. There are currently 34 of these study hubs in regional Australia. We have committed to 20 more in the regions, and, for the first time, we will be setting up 14 in the outer suburbs of major cities. Because for those kids growing up in the outer suburbs, this has become a big and growing challenge, as much as it is for those in the regions.

This year, I've had the chance to visit and meet with students at rural clinical schools right around Australia, including in Cairns, Far North Queensland, Orange, Bathurst in New South Wales and Launceston in Tasmania. These young people are a testament to the changing structure of our higher education system and the changing nature of our healthcare system. It's not only kids of doctors who can become doctors in Australia today; it's the sons and daughters of farmers and teachers and firefighters who will contribute to their communities and make that much-needed change for their communities, lifting those communities, lifting the economic purpose, lifting the financial security of those communities and, in turn, providing the health care that those communities so desperately need and deserve. The answer to more doctors for the bush is to train more kids from the bush. A key part of that is giving every Australian—wherever they're born, wherever they live, wherever they grow up—the very best opportunity to get to higher education, whether through TAFE or university, and to succeed when they get there.

Another recommendation from the Australian Universities Accord interim report is to remove the 50 per cent pass rule. As it currently stands, students are required to pass at least half of their units of study to keep their eligibility for Commonwealth assistance. The rule was implemented by the former coalition government back in January 2022 as part of what they called their job-ready graduates programs. However, what we have seen and what has been borne out is that it's nothing but punitive for struggling students. As the minister noted, Universities Australia has described the rule as 'widely regarded as being unnecessarily harsh'. It disproportionately effects first nations students, students from low socioeconomic backgrounds and underrepresented students.

I have visited many students at the University of Newcastle, Ourimbah Campus. Many of them, through the enabling programs, have told me about their own experiences, where they've had caring responsibilities for a loved one and the financial situation in their household has meant that they couldn't successfully finish school or where the challenges their family had to face made it really tough for them to be able to get through secondary school. In my community, students will likely come through an enabling program like Open Foundation or Yapug.

It's so important that those students have the very best support to succeed, particularly in a tough semester. When I was taking my final exam to be a pharmacist, one of my close friends from school passed away. That can have a big impact on you when you're going to take an exam, when you're sitting an oral exam. We need to make sure that the right scaffolding is there in support around people to make sure that when they get there, after all the struggle to complete secondary school or get through an enabling program—when they're at university—they get the very best chance to succeed. So I am so pleased on behalf of the many young people and other people in my community who have been adversely impacted by this that this is going to change. It's an important change. As I said, the rule disproportionately affects First Nations students, students from communities like mine and other underrepresented types of students. That you could lose your education support because of the death of a family member or you have caring responsibilities resulting in a particularly tough semester is not fair. The removal of this rule has been called for by universities across Australia, and I'm pleased that we're doing it. I'm pleased to support this amendment bill because it does just that, remove the unfair and unjust rule that affects students who are doing it tough.

While we do that, we need to give students the best chance to succeed not only academically but personally. That means that we need better approaches for identifying students who need help and we need to get better at connecting students to that support. We need to provide enough wraparound support for students—financial, housing and, importantly, mental health and wellbeing support. I note the former minister, the member for Wannon, is in the House. I'm sure that what he did was well intentioned, but we are seeing students who are struggling and who are worse off because of it. We're pleased to see that it is being scrapped. We need to take into consideration the person behind the laptop and make sure that we're giving that person the best chance of success, and that is what these amendments are about.

Deputy Speaker Freelander, with your indulgence, I would like to finish on a personal note if I may. To my nephew Gus: happy 21st birthday! I know just how challenging it was to complete school and your sound-engineering course through COVID and while juggling work. Your mum and dad and our family are very proud of you and the creative, kind, capable young man you are today. So many young people like my nephew Gus and my niece Isabel went through that very difficult time of finishing secondary school through COVID and making that start in life, whether it was through higher education or going straight into the workforce. With my responsibilities as Assistant Minister for Mental Health and Suicide Prevention, it is absolutely front of mind for us to make sure that every young person, whatever their circumstances—who have, particularly, been through this very challenging time—gets the best start in life, and that is part of this legislation, to give them the best chance.

As I said at the beginning, education can be a great leveller, but that is only the case if we give everyone the chance of a world-class education. Australia has some of the best universities in the world; I was fortunate to attend Sydney university. We need to make sure that all Australians have a chance to walk through their gates and to leave with the very best start in life—a quality education.

Dan Tehan (Wannon, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Immigration and Citizenship) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

It's an absolute pleasure to rise to speak on the Higher Education Support Amendment (Response to the Australian Universities Accord Interim Report) Bill 2023 because it will enable me to clarify a few facts which tend to get lost in debates like this, and facts, in the end, are pretty important. We had one member say that no support was provided to universities during the pandemic. That is blatantly wrong. The universities came to the government, and they had one main request. That was that they would continue to get their Commonwealth Grant Scheme funding, no matter what happened to student intakes during that period of time. So we basically guaranteed universities' baseline funding. We delivered that to them in a very short period of time so they had that certainty. So any discussion or any debate that, because we didn't provide JobKeeper, universities then went and sacked members of their staff is just wrong. We guaranteed their baseload funding to them. Not only that, we went one step further. Because international students couldn't come into this country, we said to the universities: 'We're going to provide you with a one-off payment of funding for research.' That one-off payment of funding for research was $1 billion. It was the largest injection of research funding that has ever been provided to the university sector in its history. This idea that they weren't funded is a complete and utter nonsense. I can go even further and say: look at the universities' financial records as they came out of the pandemic—look at the analysis done by the Australian Financial Review. It clearly shows that their balance sheets came out incredibly healthy. Let's get that fact on the table to start with.

The other fact I'd like to address, and it's one which comes to this bill, is the reason we put in place a rule around students failing. This rule was put in place to stop universities churning students through units and courses that they were failing and racking up large HECS debts. The government needs to be honest about what they're doing. The universities did not like being held to account in this regard. The previous speaker mentioned a student might have a death in the family, or an illness, or something like that. We put in place very clear guidelines and exemptions that those students would be exempt from this rule. But what this was about was stopping universities—and they do it to those from low socioeconomic environments and they do it to Indigenous students. They don't put the wraparound services and protections in place so that those students pass their courses. What happens is that those students just continue on and they rack up a HECS debt and fail. So we put this pass rule in place. We were saying clearly to universities, 'You will not be able to continue to charge HECS to these students because they're failing.' What they need to do is bring these students in and say, 'Is this course appropriate for you?' Or, 'We are going to provide the services for you to make sure you do pass.' That wasn't happening. What you're doing by taking this rule out is you're going to make sure you see that happening again. This was about holding universities to account. It wasn't about the students. It was about making sure that the universities look after students properly, and look after Indigenous students from rural and regional areas. It's making sure that they are not put in the wrong courses, do a whole course, fail it and then end up with a HECS debt and nothing to show for it.

So I would say to the government, 'Think long and hard about what you're doing here.' Why do universities not like this pass rule? Because it holds them to account. It's the first time we are holding them to account, and you want to take that away. Do you know who will suffer? It's the students. It's the students from the low socioeconomic backgrounds, it's the students from rural and regional Australia, it's the Indigenous students from rural and regional Australia. To show why that was what we had in mind, it was students from rural and regional Australia and Indigenous students from rural and regional Australia that we gave additional support to at that time and put more money into the sector to support those students. We want them to succeed. Because if you look at the problem with the higher education system—and it's a problem which just isn't alone for the higher education system—the further you are from the capital city, the less the likelihood or chances that you will go to university, or that if you go you will succeed. What the government is doing—and it always does it—is becoming city-centric again. Who's going to suffer the most? It will be those students from rural and regional areas, those low socioeconomic students, and those Indigenous students from rural and remote Australia. What you are doing is acting at the behest of the universities to disadvantage students even more. It is bad policy. The one area where we were actually able to get universities to be held to account, you are now taking away, and they will benefit as a result of it. It is very, very bad policy.

The one thing that concerns me—and I commend the shadow minister for education—is that, with all the assumptions that this change is based on, it sounds like there has been no proper, thorough research done into it at all. As the shadow minister's amendment shows, it all seems to be based on, literally, pressure from universities, rather than doing the research, getting the data and making changes based on the facts. I would say to the government: have a look at it over a period of time. Get your facts right. Make the universities put the wraparound support in place for these students, rather than taking away the one thing which holds them to account on this.

I would also ask the government to look at the impact that the previous government's record investment in the regions has had on participation by rural and regional students, and rural and regional Indigenous students, in accessing higher education and staying longer in education. Have a look at how our regional university centres have worked. Have a look at where the model is working well and where it could be improved, and make sure you look to focus your investment on those regional university centres. Make sure that the provision of higher education is spread out right across this nation. We also have to make sure that, on the fringes of our big capital cities, the universities that are providing for low-socioeconomic students are getting the opportunities that they need, as well.

It is equally important that they look at how students get the choice between vocational education and higher education. The countries that best provide the skills for their companies and businesses, small and large, are ones which get the balance right between vocational education and higher education. One of the things that I really worry about with this new government is that the focus seems to be entirely on getting more and more people into higher education. If you look at the countries that do education well, they get the balance right between vocational education and higher education.

One of the things that we did—and I would hope this government would continue to do it—is build the esteem and investment in vocational education in this nation. That is going to require working collaboratively and cooperatively with the states. We also need to say to the states, when it comes to vocational education, 'You have to lift your game.' We're not seeing the pride in and emphasis on vocational education that we see when it comes to higher education. I would say to the education minister: please do not lose sight, through your university accord—or what there is of it—of the importance of vocational education. If we are truly to provide our country with the skills that it needs for the future, then vocational education is a critical component of it. One of my frustrations, as education minister, was seeing how we could get better interaction and engagement from the states when it came to the provision of vocational education, and providing proper vocational education in the areas where we have skills shortages.

This is one of our nation's great challenges. The previous minister, Michaelia Cash, embarked on a pathway to really improve that aspect of our higher education sector but, unfortunately, the course we were taking continued to run up against resistance from state governments. Now my worry is that the new government will not be putting the emphasis that's needed on vocational education to make sure that we do have those skills that we need going forward as a nation.

In summary, I would ask the government, once again, to seriously think about what they're doing with the change they're making to this pass rule. It was been hard fought to get it through the Senate. It was hard fought because it holds the universities to account, to make sure that they're providing the extra, additional tuition, wraparound services and support that's required for students to make sure they pass their courses. It was designed and built to ensure that students don't do a full degree and fail it, and have a huge HECS debt and nothing to show for it apart from a HECS debt which they would take years to repay. The people who are impacted by this churn are those who are the most vulnerable: rural and regional students, Indigenous students from rural and regional areas and low-socioeconomic students. Look at the legislation that was put through, because it was well thought through. There are exemptions there for when there might be a death in the family, or where there might be an illness. This was about holding the universities to account; it wasn't about trying to do something which would disadvantage students. What you are doing is again setting those students up to fail, and to not have the universities held to account for those failures.

I will finish on this note: any talk about our previous government not investing in universities, especially during the pandemic, is a complete and utter nonsense. We did the one thing that the universities asked for, and that was to underwrite their Commonwealth grants schemes. The second thing we did was to provide the largest one-off payment of research funding that this nation has ever seen. Those over there don't like it. A $1 billion dollar one-off payment in research funding was provided. Rather than welcoming it and saying 'well done', they just won't register that that's what we did, and it shows you how ideologically blind they are in everything they do.

Debate adjourned.

Ordered that the resumption of the debate be made an order of the day for a later hour.