Helen Polley (Tasmania, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Parliamentary Secretary for Aged Care) Share this | Hansard source

I rise today to speak once again on the government's reckless move to deregulate Australian universities, cut university spending and increase student fees, and in turn create an endless cycle of debt and inequality in this country.

In November 2013, Christopher Pyne said:

We want university students to make their contribution, but we're not going to raise fees …

And everyone knows the famous quote the now Prime Minister made hours before the last federal election that there will be 'no cuts to education'. We know that that could not be any further from the truth.

But the contribution from Senator McKenzie a little earlier was breathtaking. She comes in here purporting to represent rural and regional Australia, as a Nationals senator, yet she is supporting a government that is going to do nothing but make it even more difficult for students from rural and regional Australia to go to university.

If this bill were to get through we know what effect it would have on universities across the country, no more so than what it would do to the University of Tasmania, in my home state. A lot of what Senator Carr has already put on the record spells out the arguments as to why we are opposed to this legislation and this attack on higher education, and it is for the same reason that many in the community have strongly voiced their concerns. They know what the effect will be, not only on the students who are at university now, but on so many families who will have to make choices. Those choices are going to be tough ones, if these changes were ever to be implemented. There will be some families that will have to make a choice about which of their children, if any, could ultimately attend university. We on this side of the chamber will always stand up for those young people, because they deserve an opportunity to go to university if they choose to.

If only Australians had known of this government's plans before the last election. It really makes you question what this government stands for. In total, this government intends to cut $5.8 billion from higher education, teaching, learning and research in our universities.

Under the government's changes to universities—unprecedented, I might add—they will be forced to put up their fees just to cover the loss of funding, which amounts to an average of 20 per cent across all undergraduate studies. Unrestrained fee hikes, and applying a compound interest rate to all HECS-HELP debts will hurt students across the country. It will create debt for students beyond belief. At worst it would deter Australians from going to university.

Members of this government are the gatekeepers. They are initiating these unfair, unprincipled decisions in order to keep people from going to university. They are engaged in conduct to create further inequality in this country. It is shameful and I will not stand for it, and nor will my colleagues. The Labor Party will not stand for it and the Australian community will not stand for it.

Senator McKenzie said that we should be putting the facts to the chamber, so I would like to address the contribution that was made by Senator Cash. I believe that I will be able to demonstrate that she misquoted the Australian Nursing and Midwifery Federation. In their submissions to the Senate inquiry on higher education reform, the Australian Nursing and Midwifery Federation said that a nursing degree under a deregulated system would range from $24,000 to $34,000. Whilst this may or may not be right, what it certainly does is dispels the lies and disinformation that is being spread by the other side that a degree would cost $100,000. To quote the federation, 'Depending on fee levels that could be set at any range following deregulation, and as our submission clearly states, nursing degrees could increase in excess of $65,000.' I thought it was important that we put that on the record.

We know that in the United States, the system Christopher Pyne seems so keen to emulate, university fee rises are out of control and student debt now exceeds credit card debt. The system is broken and it feeds inequality. In Australia, under the current system, the very system we have today, universities have perfect freedom to compete on price. So we know fees will go up substantially. We will have $100,000 degrees. But that is not all. This government has also decided to add a real interest charge on the HECS-HELP loans. Just when you thought it could not get any worse, yes, it does. Applying real interest rates to HECS is regressive. That is why students and stakeholders are opposed to it. Every single stakeholder, except the worst Treasurer in our history, Treasurer Joe Hockey, thinks this idea reeks. A real interest rate on HECS-HELP loans means a degree will cost a lot more than the course fee and will take much longer to pay off. Without compounding interest, those who earn low incomes or who take time out of the workforce to raise a family will end up paying the most. That is what this government does not take into account. It does not take into account the individual circumstances of students and the individual circumstances of families. What about a single mother who wants to go back to university and who wants to better her future and the future of her children? How is she supposed to cope? How is she supposed to get by and afford to go to university?

Ignoring all the evidence of higher fees and crippling debt, Mr Christopher Pyne has claimed that his higher education changes will actually benefit students from low socioeconomic backgrounds because they include the so-called Commonwealth scholarships. This claim is the biggest mistruth of all. The scholarship scheme will receive no Commonwealth funding—no money at all from this government. It is to be funded entirely by other students. It is shameful. Shame on those opposite for bringing in the most detrimental changes to universities in Australia's history. A university education is a path to opportunity for individuals. It allows individuals, families and the community more broadly to benefit from individuals who would like the opportunity to better themselves through higher education. This opportunity has been recklessly ripped away from students.

I want to reflect briefly on Labor's record when it comes to higher education. We have a proud record. We are the party that understands that if someone wants to pull themselves up through higher education, then they should have the opportunity to do so. It should not matter where you live or what family come from. If you are an Australian, then you should be entitled to go to university at a cost that will not burden your future. Labor boosted universities' real revenue per student, including government and student contributions, by 10 per cent. This represented an extra $1,700 for universities to spend on quality teaching for every student. Labor lifted government investment in universities from $8 billion in 2007 to $14 billion in 2013.

We are committed to proper indexation for university funds. If we kept the funding model introduced by the Howard government, universities would today be worse off to the tune of $3 billion. If our funding model were to be maintained, Commonwealth investment in universities would be $17 billion a year by 2017. Labor made it easier for young people to study with the students start-up scholarships, which helped more than 427,000 Australians with the cost of study. We also introduced a relocation scholarship, helping 76,000 people leave home to obtain their degree.

Labor boosted funding for regional universities by 56 per cent. There are 750,000 students at Australian universities today and one in every four of them is there because of Labor. We put 190,000 more students on campus, we boosted Indigenous student numbers by 26 per cent, we boosted regional student numbers by 30 per cent and we had more than 36,000 extra students from low-income families in universities compared to 2007. Labor also invested $4.35 billion in world-class research and teaching facilities through the Education Investment Fund. That includes $500 million earmarked for regional Australia, so that country kids would have the same access to quality courses in universities and regional universities would be able to attract and retain world-class researchers.

That is what we did. We are not like those on the other side, who come into this place and purport to be here representing rural and regional Australia. We actually deliver to rural and regional Australia. We did all of this not because it was a vote winner but because it is the right thing to do. We did this because we understand what university means in a way that the coalition never has and never will. It is an opportunity for every Australian, but I do not think that those opposite will ever understand it. It really is a shame.

Now I will talk a little bit about my home state of Tasmania and the University of Tasmania. We in Tasmania only have one university and it is a great university. It is already feeling under pressure from this government, because there will be in excess of $30 million ripped away from that university. There is not necessarily other opportunities for Tasmanians to be able to choose to go to another university. They may not have the means to be able to move interstate and to study at other universities. There will not be any competition that is going to make their opportunities any better in my home state.

I can tell you about a visit that I made recently to the university at the Hobart campus; it was to the Wicking Dementia Research and Education Centre. I discussed with those students there their passion for what they are doing. This centre is providing opportunities for individuals to obtain to degrees which will help people suffering from dementia and help people overcome this debilitating disease. This is a real and pressing concern in my home state of Tasmania. That is, that the University of Tasmania will be forced to cut staff, cut courses and condense what they are able to offer to the community.

It has recently been reported that the Newnham campus in Launceston will be forced to condense its campus. Downgrading the university's northern campus will force students to think about whether they attend university at all, whether they are able to attend the University of Tasmania in Hobart and whether they would be forced to try to access an interstate university. There is real doubt about the future of the university in northern Tasmania, because of those opposite. That is because of their decision to cut $30 million from the University of Tasmania's funding.

Senator McKenzie made reference to the fact that we have a low retention rate of young Tasmanians going on to higher education. That is exactly right. But instead of trying to ensure that those young people have the opportunity to attend the University of Tasmania, they are going to make it more and more difficult. I have been informed that there are currently discussions occurring about restructuring and downsizing the staff, so there will be staff cuts if this goes through. Unfortunately, it seems that the member for Bass, Andrew Nikolic, is in favour of the university downsizing and potentially relocating to Inveresk. I cannot fathom why Mr Nikolic would have this view. This was how he was quoted in the newspaper yesterday. He knows that a cut to the University of Tasmania to the tune of $30 million means that it will be forced into an undesirable position—one for which this government will bear the consequences.

Those opposite fail to understand the importance of education. Every time those opposite get into federal government they do exactly the same thing: they cut education. They would rather see people from low-socioeconomic backgrounds not go to university, because they do not agree with the option of there being higher education for all. That is really sad. Every time there is a change of government and Labor come back in, we build up the education system in this country. We give greater opportunities for all students to go onto university, to have the best education they can, because we know the value of education. Sometimes people just need a helping hand. They need a hand-up; they do not want a hand-out. But the government—as we know from the budget measures that they are trying to get through this place—are abandoning the most vulnerable people in our community. They are making it more and more difficult for young people to access higher education.

The then Leader of the Opposition said before the election that there will be no cuts to education. And what happened? Those opposite are proposing cuts to education that will have an enormous impact on all the universities in this country. Those opposite said that there will be no cuts to the pension; there will be no change to the pension. That was clearly wrong, because the way they intend to index the age pension will affect those who rely on it in this country.

Those opposite said that there will be no cuts to health, and now they want to introduce a $7 co-payment for GPs. Every time you have a pathology test, it will cost another $7. Some people have to have blood tests on a regular basis. People will be trying to decide: 'Should I really have the blood test this month or not? Do I have that extra $7?' For those people on the other side, $7 probably does not seem like very much to you. However, as I have had to live on a very limited income and be reliant on the government for part of the time in raising my children, I can tell you that at the end of your fortnight $7 is a lot of money when you just do not have it—not because you have wasted your money but because you are on a limited income. But those people on that side of the chamber clearly do not understand those circumstances.

So I say again to those opposite that they fail to understand the importance of education. They fail to understand the importance of providing the young people and the mature-age people of this country with the opportunity of attending university to either further their education or take undertake study for the first time because they were not able to do so before. Unfortunately, people on that side of the chamber fail to realise that. They do not realise that every Australian has the right to improve their lot in life. They deserve the opportunity to go to university. They do not deserve to be saddled with a huge debt when they leave university and are trying to establish themselves in the workforce or providing for a family.

The proper funding of universities is an investment in Australia's future. This government should not be let off the hook when it comes to university funding. This rushed package of broken promises must be scrapped. We on this side will not rest, and I know that there are those in the community who will also not rest, until this package of bills is defeated. The government should go back to the drawing board and consult with the sector and the community before it announces policy changes that will create greater inequality in this country.

The failings of this government are in a whole range of areas, not just in health, not just in education and not just in my area of responsibility of aged care. This government does not know how to go out and consult with the community or with the sectors. They do not understand that. As I said earlier today in the chamber: the minister responsible for aged care in this country has taken his eye off the ball. He has not taken advice from his department. He has not consulted with his sector. And here we have yet another example of an arrogant, out-of-touch government that has failed to consult the education sector. (Time expired)