Nick Xenophon (SA, Independent) Share this | Hansard source

I will make a brief contribution on this very important bill. The legislation that we have before us today is not something that can or should be taken lightly. It represents a massive change to the way we fund higher education in Australia; and, once we go down this track, I believe there is no turning back. There are a lot of factors that I have weighed up in coming to a decision on this very important issue and, in good conscience, I cannot support the second reading of the Higher Education and Research Reform Amendment Bill 2014. I will outline the reasons for that briefly, shortly. But I will say this about the education minister, Mr Pyne: he has been a consummate professional in the way that he has articulated a very difficult case for the government, as has his advisers, such as Dr John Markwell, who has been nothing short of outstanding. But I cannot in good conscience support this bill for a whole range of reasons.

Firstly, I acknowledge that universities need more funding. I do not believe the current system is sustainable, unless current and future governments make the commitment to properly fund our university sector. The previous government planned to take $6.6 billion from the sector. I acknowledge that not all of these cuts have come into effect—although, over $4 billion has, and that has hurt the sector deeply. The government has said that it will cut funding by a further 20 per cent on average and that, in terms of the budget, the measures in this bill will save $4 billion, including $1.1 billion over three years from cuts to course funding. In my view, this is not an argument for deregulation per se. I believe that higher education, like health and social security, is an area where government should be spending money, provided it is spent wisely. Higher education is a clear and obvious pathway to a more productive and prosperous Australia

Governments should be investing in our future. Cuts to education are simply a false economy because, while we may save money in the short term, you can guarantee we will end up paying a lot more in the long term.

Secondly, while I am not opposed to some reforms in the sector, changes of this magnitude should have been an election issue. The Prime Minister, when he was opposition leader, in an address to Universities Australia at a higher education conference in Canberra, on 28 February last year, said:

In an era of busy government and constant change, it’s insufficiently recognised how often masterly inactivity can be the best contribution that government can make to a particular sector. A period of relative policy stability in which changes already made can be digested and adjusted to (such as the move to demand-driven funding) is probably what our universities most need now.

Masterly activity appeared to be the policy of the government in respect of higher education. Instead, we have some quite radical reforms for this sector. I note that a number of amendments have been proposed and negotiated by the government. Those amendments will change this bill significantly and ought to be considered closely and carefully. But I still have a threshold issue, which is that more and more Australians are disillusioned with the political process. In a debate on the issue of submarines earlier, I quoted Hugh Mackay, the social researcher, psychologist and writer who, back in 1998, wrote in the Sydney Morning Herald: 'With trust in the political process being eroded with every principle, every broken promise and every policy backflip, the level of cynicism has reached breaking point for many Australians.' I suggest that they were halcyon days. Back then, John Howard, who did break his promise on the GST, to his absolute credit had the courage to go to the people and run an election based on the GST. He won the election and had a clear mandate for that reform. He articulated his vision for reform to the electorate. He won the election and deserved to get the GST changes through.

An incident having occurred in the gallery—