Paul Fletcher (Bradfield, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Government Services and the Digital Economy) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise to speak on the Education Services for Overseas Students Amendment (Quality and Integrity) Bill 2024. This bill amends the Education Services for Overseas Students Act 2000 to make changes which the government says will improve the quality and integrity of the international student sector. It is important Australians are not misled by the primary purpose of the bill. The government's real agenda is to attempt to fix the immigration mess it has created after taking decisions to drastically increase the migration intake, putting further strain on housing, infrastructure and essential services in Australia. In my contribution to this second reading debate, I want to outline the key elements of this bill and its central flaws.

The government's mismanagement of Australia's immigration system has led to the number of international students in Australia more than doubling, from 336,845 in March 2022 to a peak of 713,144 in February 2024. Under Labor there are 80,000 student visa holders who are on their third student visa or more. Some are on an eighth, ninth or 10th student visa. There's a backdoor way to stay in Australia to work. The government's failure to manage Australia's international education sector with the requisite certainty and fairness is causing economic harm to Australian universities, private higher education providers, English-language course providers and the vocational education and training sector. So we should not be fooled by the government's divisive and offensive false narrative that the meteoric growth in international student numbers on its watch has been driven by the so-called shonks and crooks as the Minister for Education, the member for Blaxland, contended in his second reading speech on the bill. While the coalition acknowledges that this bill contains some integrity measures, the government's amendments to the Education Services for Overseas Students Act are primarily concerned with the imposition of a cap on the number of foreigners who can study in Australia. This is an immigration mess entirely of this government's own making.

The bill before the House introduces new ministerial powers for the Minister for Education to set caps on the number of international students who can study in Australia at any one time—not just for each educational institution but for each campus location and course. It is proposed that the methodology for the minister's decision would be set out in a legislative instrument to be tabled in parliament by 31 December 2024, supposedly after consultation with stakeholders. The sector will be required to put in place new caps from 1 January 2025, leaving them with potentially only one day's notice to implement the scheme. This ludicrous timeline lays bare the rushed nature of this legislation and the government's panic. Given the lack of consultation to date and the manner in which the higher education sector has been blindsided by this proposal, it is no wonder that higher education providers are concerned about what lies ahead.

In 2022-23, the international student market generated $36.4 billion in revenue, Australia's fourth largest export. The minister in his second reading speech spoke enthusiastically about this industry, saying:

… it doesn't just make us money.

It also makes us friends.

I asked the minister: where are those friends? This sector is already reeling from erratic shifts in policy that demonstrate that, when it comes to the management of immigration, the government is all at sea.

After opening the floodgates to international students, the government then covertly implemented policies which discriminated against regional and smaller universities, as well as private higher education and vocational education and training, or VET, providers, by targeting the processing of student visa applications from these institutions. On 22 April, in an article entitled 'Unis ban Indian student applications as visa rejections hit record high', the Sydney Morning Herald reported:

Universities are blocking applications from students from entire countries as the federal government's latest stage in its migration crackdown makes it even tougher for some institutions to recruit foreign pupils.

Some universities, including at least one prestigious Group of Eight institution, have taken the drastic step of banning or limiting applications from countries deemed at high risk of visa refusal, including India and Nepal.

Vice chancellors from smaller universities say the processing of visas has been highly unpredictable and has targeted them unfairly.

This flies in the face of the Prime Minister's joint commitment with Prime Minister Modi of India, made at the first Australia-India annual summit, in March 2023, that 'the efficient and timely processing of student visa applications for Indian nationals' would be facilitated.

This bill also reflects the lack of confidence the government has in the Minister for Immigration, Citizenship and Multicultural Affairs and the Minister for Home Affairs, because it gives the power to determine the number of international students who can study in Australia not to those ministers but to the Minister for Education. He merely is required to consult with the Minister for Skills and Training. On one level, it seems very odd indeed to give this power to the Minister for Education and not the minister for immigration, but perhaps the rationale is the disastrous track record of the minister for immigration, with dangerous criminals released onto the streets and the overturning of dozens of visa cancellations of foreign criminals as a result of the minister for immigration having issued direction 99. There is also no clarity as to how the minister's determination on the capping of foreign students will be implemented as a practical measure by the Department of Home Affairs given it has responsibility for the issuing of student visas.

As was made clear in the Leader of the Opposition's budget-in-reply speech, the coalition is concerned about the large influx of international students into our major universities in recent years. At the University of Sydney, for instance, almost half of all students enrolled in semester 1 this year are international students—some 32,800 students. Last year, the university's revenue windfall from international students was $1.46 billion, and the university has made $8 billion from international students since 2017.

Universities operate not just in accordance with legislation and regulations but with a social licence: the trust and confidence that stakeholders and the broader community place in our higher education institutions. A social licence to operate, including in relation to the education of international students is earned through responsible behaviour, transparency and accountability. The social licence to bring in very high numbers of international students to study in Australia is, rightly, brought into question when universities fail to look after the interests of both domestic and international students.

The coalition has been raising these concerns over many months. In a speech to the Australian Technology Network of Universities in July 2023, the shadow minister for education, Senator Henderson, said:

Certainly, if universities are going to continue to sell the dream of an Australian education to international students, the sector must take greater responsibility to ensure students don't end up couch surfing just to make ends meet. … Labor's Big Australia policy also has big consequences for domestic students who need access to affordable housing and strong job prospects to thrive and succeed.

The bill before the House today redefines an 'education agent', it inserts a new definition of 'education agent commission' and it strengthens the fit-and-proper test for providers engaging with education agents. Providers will also be required to disclose information on commissions paid upon request by the Secretary of the Department of Education. This will be used to ensure regulation of the sector and to deter operators who may be attempting to subvert Australia's migration system and to exploit students. Education agents operate both overseas and in Australia to sell the dream of an Australian education. They also facilitate the domestic transfer to other providers for students seeking to transfer to another course. In 2023, there were around 5,800 education agencies and more than 23,000 individual education agents facilitating overseas student enrolments with Australian education providers, reflecting the sheer size of this market.

The 2022 Quality Indicators for Learning and Teaching survey reported that around 86 per cent of international students who study in Australia use an education agent to facilitate their enrolment. Providers, typically, pay a commission to these agents per student; the exact amount is not disclosed but it's often up to 15 per cent of their first year of tuition fees. That's around $7,500 per student recruited. Ensuring the integrity of these operations is imperative to protect our largest services export and the international students who choose to study here.

While supportive of increased integrity measures, stakeholders have raised a range of concerns about these amendments. Part 3 of the bill provides the Minister for Education with the power to limit the registration of new providers or the registration of new courses by existing providers, including by pausing registrations for a period of up to 12 months. While the explanatory memorandum states that the minister will 'only exercise this power in limited circumstances', the sector does not share this confidence. Naturally, course details and content can change over time. Currently, if there are material changes in a course then providers need to go through reregistration and approval processes. Limits put in place by the minister for periods of up to 12 months will have significant impacts a provider's ability to meet expected standards and to keep course material current. The CEO of English Australia, Mr Ian Aird, said:

… giving the Minister the power to take whole course types off CRICOS—

an acronym for the Commonwealth Register of Institutions and Courses for Overseas Students—

because of integrity concerns about a number of providers offering them, appears to mean that good providers will be punished because government hasn't equipped a regulator capable of ensuring providers abide by the rules.

Part 4 of the bill will require providers to deliver courses to only domestic students for two consecutive years before being able to apply for registration to deliver courses to international students. We note the sensible exemption for ELICOS and foundation course providers. An exemption for table A providers has also been included. Stakeholders and education experts have rightly raised their eyebrows at this.

Part 5 of the bill will institute automatic cancellation of a provider's registration where a course has not been delivered to an overseas student for a period of 12 months. On the surface, this appears sensible, and the government has advised that there are exemptions available where a genuine reason is provided.

Part 6 of the bill will enable automatic suspension of a provider's registration where TEQSA, ASQA or a state authority determines the provider does not meet the fit-and-proper test or where a provider is under investigation. We note concerns raised about the drafting of this provision, including by the CEO of Universities Australia, Luke Sheehy, who said:

A concerning aspect of the legislation, as drafted, is that it would give the Minister power to suspend providers who exceed their cap for a year. This level of overreach is appalling and contrary to risk-based and proportionate regulation …

Let me make some concluding remarks. I want to be clear that, while the coalition will support sensible and constructive improvements to the quality and integrity of the education offered to international students, we are disappointed about the minister's false narrative characterising this bill as a response to the so-called shonks and crooks in the sector. If there has been such widespread unscrupulous activity within the sector, why has there been so little action? After two years, the Minister for Home Affairs has only issued letters to 34 providers just a few weeks ago. No provider has been shut down or fined. Ghost colleges, which provide a backdoor to foreigners to come to Australia and work, should be weeded out. We await the outcome of this investigation. Nonetheless, given that there are more than 1,400 private higher education and VET providers, many of which are doing a first-class job to service international students, the minister's approach in tarnishing this sector as a whole is most regrettable.

The government's Universities Accord process promised so much to the higher education sector, but, after two years, apart from endorsing coalition proposals, such as an independent student ombudsman, we have seen very little by way of meaningful reform. We have seen lots of promises but very little delivery. There have been plenty of disappointing developments, including the axing of research funding for the regions, the nonsensical Startup Year loan scheme and the overturning of the job-ready graduates scheme, which threatens to raise the cost of nursing and teaching degrees. Nor as yet have we seen Labor bring forward legislation to implement its promise to lower student debt indexation. The minister announced that sky-high HELP indexation rates, driven by Labor's high inflation, would be lowered from 7.1 per cent to 3.2 per cent last year and from 4.7 per cent to four per cent this year, but where is the bill to give effect to these changes? When will the refunds promised to three million Australians be delivered?

As for the bill before the House today, there are considerable issues raised by it, reflecting some serious failings of the Albanese government. These failings are noted in the second reading amendment in my name, which I now move:

That all words after "That" be omitted with a view to substituting the following words:

"whilst not declining to give the bill a second reading, the House notes that:

(1) the Government has taken decisions to drastically increase the migration intake putting further strain on housing, infrastructure and essential services in Australia;

(2) the Government's mismanagement of Australia's immigration system has led to more than double the number of international students in Australia from 336,845 in March 2022 to 713,144 as at February 2024;

(3) under Labor there are 80,000 student visa holders who are on to their third student visa or more. Some are on an eighth, ninth or tenth student visa, as a backdoor way to stay in Australia to work;

(4) the Government's failure to manage Australia's international education sector is causing economic harm to Australian universities, private higher education providers, English language course providers and the vocational education sector;

(5) the bill reflects the lack of confidence the Government has in the Minister for Immigration and Minister for Home Affairs by giving the power to determine the number of international students who can study in Australia to the Minister for Education;

(6) calls on the Government to rebalance Australia's migration program and manage its impacts on housing, congestion and essential services; and

(7) given its deficiencies, the bill has been referred to the Senate Education and Employment Legislation Committee for inquiry to report by 15 August 2024".

I conclude by indicating that the opposition welcomes the opportunity to examine this bill in detail during the Senate inquiry, which is underway and will report on 15 August. We will have more to say following that process.

Ross Vasta (Bonner, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Is the amendment seconded?

Kevin Hogan (Page, National Party, Shadow Minister for Trade and Tourism) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I second the amendment and reserve my right to speak.

Debate adjourned.