Gavin Marshall (Victoria, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Hansard source

Thank you, Senator Mason, for acknowledging that. The government instituted the Bradley review and we have instigated significant reforms in this sector to make it fairer. We have also put in an enormous increase in funding.

I remember when I came into this place as a senator in 2002 I was shocked that in the so-called clever country there could be degrees that cost $100,000. It made a mockery of our merit based system and led to our top universities chasing dollars by charging as much as they thought they could get away with, in a system where they were encouraged to do this by the conservative, Howard government of the time. We have put an end to that. Over their 11 years, the Howard government undermined the higher education sector. In their first budget, in 1996, they slashed university operating grants by a cumulative six per cent over the forward estimates from 1997 to 2000, resulting in an $850 million cut to the sector. When we came to office, the participation of rural, regional and low-SES students in higher education had fallen and showed no signs of improvement. Who was in government at the time? The Nationals, in a coalition with the Liberals. Did we hear about this sort of thing from the Nationals then? No—not a squeak while they were in government undermining higher education and making it more expensive for regional students. That is what they were doing.

Youth allowance arrangements were poorly targeted, and assistance was not going to those students most in need, as was found by the Bradley review of education. The student-staff ratio was 20.4, compared with 14.6 in 1995, just as the Howard government came to office. That is the damage they did in their 11 years. The average amount of Commonwealth funding per student in real terms declined by nearly $1,500, and fees and charges had increased by over $3,000. That is the record of the coalition government in the Howard years. HECS had increased dramatically, by tens of thousands of dollars for most students.

The wording of this MPI criticises the Labor government for its treatment of students in regional Australia, so I take it that the Nationals are criticising this government for introducing comprehensive reforms to ensure that more university students have fairer access to student income support, benefiting students from low-socioeconomic backgrounds and students who move away from home to study, particularly those from rural and regional areas. More students—that is what we are doing with our reforms: more students will have access.