Jordon Steele-John (WA, Australian Greens) Share this | Hansard source

If anyone wants to tell me the seat he represents, I'll send him an apology basket. It's just a really sad thing at this particular moment in our history to see an opposition, so-called—and Senator Waters is right to remind you that the primary function, you'll be shocked to find out, of an opposition is in fact to oppose. It's a crazy, really strange notion. Can you guys actually remember what that's like? It's when the government, the Liberal Party, say something and, instead of saying, 'Yes, of course we'll go along with that,' you actually say no and you oppose. It's a fascinating concept. You should try it. You should give it a crack. You might like it. You might find it's not to your taste, but give it a go; it's fun to try new things every now and again. I am wearing a rather outrageous tie today, for instance. If I can do that, surely you could give being an opposition a go. We're rather enjoying it—Senator Di Natale is doing a fantastic job—but you could pitch in. You could give us a hand every now and again, just in that spirit of mateship and working together that we so often claim to be part of the Australian spirit. I'll leave it with you as a proposal.

Australia has had an education investment fund in one form or another since 1957. It has enjoyed bipartisan support all the way back to Menzies as a recognition of the inherent difficulties of funding higher education infrastructure, particularly on a needs basis or through other mechanisms. To trash it in this way is an absolute disgrace. It has to be said—and I'm sure my colleague Senator Faruqi will agree—it's a bipartisan cultural approach, this trashing of higher education. I do not forget that, during their last dying days of government, the Gillard administration took the bold step of cutting $2.1 billion out of higher education in order to fund other forms of education—and if that policy decision doesn't send you the message that you really need to go back to school then it damn well should.

Higher education is a vital part of Australia's economic and cultural future. It's within these institutions that we as a community have the opportunity to gain new skills, to reflect on who we are and to build greater depth and breadth into our society. They are bloody great things. I know that's a radical statement for some people in here. There seems to be a reflexive disdain towards university students and university institutions from some quarters of this place, which I just think is absolutely ridiculous. If you look at the economic future of this country, it is in the investment of our community in our brains, in the thinking and caring economy. We can do that work only if we have high-quality institutions and infrastructure. We've spent too long banging around education in the higher education space as a political pinata. It has spent too long as a piggy bank to be raided when something more politically fortuitous comes along. We have to re-elevate higher education to a position of sacred political status. It should be bipartisan that we strive to have the most expert and inclusive higher education system in the world.

And, while we're at it, we should do that commonsense and most fair of things and remove tuition fees from our university system and structure, because they are not fair. It should not be countenanced that future generations are forced to go into debt for hundreds of thousands of dollars while seeking an education from institutions which, thanks to pieces of legislation like this, are of poorer and poorer quality and when they are educated by staff who, despite their excellence and passion, are undermined continually by a system and culture of contract work which increasingly seeks to atomise our national higher education system. In saying that, I want to pay tribute to the wonderful work done by the national higher education union in advocating for the staff who make our higher education institutions what they are.

Climate change is the fundamental test. On that question and on the action that comes from that rides whether or not we are able to look future generations in the face—whether or not we are able to pass to them a community, a society and a land that are worth passing on. There are often howls of faux outrage when Greens in this place mention the connection between climate change and extreme weather events, such as fires. 'Oh,' it is said, 'Now is not the time, as communities are burning.' We see the spectre of that NRA-esque argument which says that, in the aftermath of a school shooting, it's not the time to support or consider gun law reform. I fundamentally reject that. It is precisely the moment: when communities are suffering, we are called to act—not just to speak, not just to pray but to act. It's not just in the immediate moment, in the immediate relief of suffering, but to show by our actions that we're doing all we can, that we're expending every effort that we can, to prevent these kinds of disasters.

This bill does no such thing; this bill is testament to the logic-free politics that rule this place in relation to climate change and extreme weather events. We shall proudly oppose it. I thank the chamber for its time.