Jacinta Collins (Victoria, Australian Labor Party, Parliamentary Secretary for School Education and Workplace Relations) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I table a supplementary explanatory memorandum relating to government amendments (1) and (2) to be moved to this bill. By leave—I move government amendments (1) and (2) on sheet BM336 together:

(1) Clause 2, page 2 (after table item 4), insert:

4A. Schedule 3A The day this Act receives the Royal Assent.

(2) Page 23 (after line 11), after Schedule 3, insert:

Schedule 3A—Student start up scholarship payments

Social Security Act 1991

1 Section 592H (note)

  Repeal the note, substitute:

     Note: The amount of the payment is to be indexed on 1 January 2017 and each later 1 January in line with CPI increases (see sections 1190 to 1194).

2 After subsection 1192(8)

  Insert:

  (8A) The student start up scholarship payment amount (see item 40 of the CPI Indexation Table in subsection 1191(1)) is not to be indexed on 1 January 2013, 1 January 2014, 1 January 2015 and 1 January 2016.

Fiona Nash (NSW, National Party, Shadow Parliamentary Secretary for Regional Education) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I can indicate to the chamber that the coalition will not be opposing the amendments, but in doing so I will make a few remarks. We certainly have a very strange situation here. On the one hand the government is making changes to VET FEE-HELP to remove barriers to education, while simultaneously increasing barriers for those wanting to access tertiary education by moving these amendments, which effectively abandons the indexation of the student start-up scholarships over the next number of years. It is an extraordinary situation, to say the least. When the government made changes to the Youth Allowance in 2010, while there were some components of it that the coalition was vehemently against, we recognised that there were some good measures in those changes. We are always happy to give credit where credit is due, and there were some good measures in those changes.

The start-up scholarships provide start-up funding to help with things such as books and specialised equipment for students, and that is a very sensible measure. To see the government now turn around and take away the indexation from the start-up scholarships is nothing short of extraordinary. We have a situation where the government say that they are trying to make things easier for students with the primary bill, yet with the amendments they are introducing they are making it harder. It simply makes no sense to those of us on this side of the chamber. Or perhaps it does indeed make sense: it makes sense because the government have got the nation's finances into such a parlous state that they are now simply having to claw back money from wherever they can find it, in what they deem as an appropriate place, to try and shore up the economic mess that they have created. On this side, we certainly believe that students are not the place that should be targeted to try and sort out this economic mess that the government have indeed created.

The Prime Minister talks about equity in education. How she can then sign off on the amendment for this legislation, which is going to make it harder for students, is nothing short of extraordinary. We have seen massive cuts of $2.4 billion to education and training in the MYEFO. Just to outline them for the chamber, we have seen: a freezing of the Sustainable Research Excellence program of $498 million; an end to the facilitation performance funding of $270 million from 2014; deferral of student support for masters by research degrees of $167 million; and the freeze on student start-up scholarships of $82.3 million. It is also alarming that we are seeing in regional areas only 33 per cent of students going on to tertiary education, compared to 55 per cent in the cities. I would say that there are some real concerns with this amendment, particularly in regional areas, because the government is saying one thing and doing another. The Prime Minister says she believes in equity in education, and yet we see this amendment to this bill indicates precisely the opposite. It is not surprising that people are becoming incredibly disappointed with this government. We now see the $140 billion debt is leading to measures, like we are seeing today in this chamber, which will provide a measure that is going to make things more difficult for students—quite extraordinary indeed.

While I indicated that the coalition will not be opposing this particular amendment, I think it is very important to place on record that the government has indeed made things more difficult for students. This follows on from things like the independent youth allowance parental cap of $150,000. How stupid is that! We have a financial assistance measure whereby students are to prove that they are independent of their parents, and the government is saying: 'If your parents earn $150,000 combined'—before tax, mind you—'you are completely ineligible for independent youth allowance.' That is just simply wrong. We are potentially talking about a school teacher and a police officer out in the regional areas whose combined income would preclude their student from being able to access independent youth allowance, having perhaps taken the provision to work hard for 12 months to prove themselves independent. It is just another example of the stupidity of this government, putting barriers in place for students in regional areas when it comes to accessing education.

I go back to the Prime Minister's continual comments about providing equity of access to students when this government is simply not. We have this amendment here before us and, in speaking to it, I am highlighting the fact that when it comes to equity in access to education for students, the government says one thing and simply does another. People across Australia, particularly in regional areas, are indeed very well aware of that.

Lee Rhiannon (NSW, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The Greens do not support the government's proposed amendments to delay the indexation of the student start-up scholarships from 1 January next year to January 2017. These amendments really put up in flashing lights the government's failure to public education, and in particular to students in a difficult situation, whether they have a low income for various reasons or they are in regional and rural areas. What is also now up in flashing lights is the coalition. We have heard a very interesting speech from Senator Nash. She has set out very clearly the problems with this amendment, but also stated very clearly that the coalition would not be opposing it. We could stop this amendment going through. The Greens are not going to be voting for it and it should not be supported. Senator Nash said very clearly that it makes no sense.

This scholarship is provided to students who meet the lower economic income criteria of various income support payments to help meet the exorbitant costs of textbooks and other study materials. We have it there, because it is a recognition that these students are already struggling economically. We have all had experience of going to many of these areas—I think most of us have, because I have heard many speeches in parliament about the difficulties students and their families are facing in coping with education costs. This has been an important measure. To gouge a group of disadvantaged people who are being urged to overcome multiple barriers of disadvantage to attend full-time study and acquire further qualifications for the future economic necessity of Australia is simply wrong. It is actually deeply offensive. Let us remember all of those speeches from the Prime Minister and her ministers about a skilled nation. We need to be providing pathways for people across the country to come into our education system, yet we have just put up a barrier until 2017. It is extraordinary. It is as though it will never come back again. This cut is part of an over $1 billion cut in higher education support for students, research and universities. It is a most backwards and very short-sighted step.

We need to look at what is happening in some of the comments that are being made about these amendments. Senator Nash spoke very effectively in exposing the government's hypocrisy in saying one thing and doing another, but she has actually done exactly the same thing herself with her speech. She has got the experience from regional areas. I have been outside this parliament on platforms where she has spoken in detail about these problems. She has done it many times in this chamber with her colleagues. But she has actually highlighted the hypocrisy of the Liberals and Nationals. I urge that we vote together to block this and that the government pulls it. At this time, to bring forward a delay in the indexation of the start-up scholarships is so deeply wrong.

Jacinta Collins (Victoria, Australian Labor Party, Parliamentary Secretary for School Education and Workplace Relations) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I will make a couple of comments in closing, to clarify the record. There is no change to the Relocation Scholarships; the changes are to the regional scholarships, or start-up scholarships. The government does have a strong record of investment in higher education and supporting students over a longer period of time. The 2005 dollar payments will remain, to assist eligible students. And the MYEFO savings are only $1.5 billion with respect to higher education.

Fiona Nash (NSW, National Party, Shadow Parliamentary Secretary for Regional Education) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I will just clarify that I am well aware that it is the start-up scholarships that this relates to. I was talking more broadly around the issues that face regional students when it comes to relocation and the extra cost burden that faces them there.

Sue Boyce (Queensland, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The question is that government amendments (1) and (2) on sheet BM336 be agreed to.

Bill, as amended, agreed to.

Bill reported with amendments; report adopted.