Kim Carr (Victoria, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister Assisting the Leader for Science) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question is to the Minister representing the Prime Minister. I refer to the Prime Minister's statement in parliament yesterday:

… the Commonwealth taxpayer will continue to cover 50 per cent of people's university education.

I also refer to the fee schedule released yesterday by the University of Western Australia which shows that under the government's plan the Commonwealth will pay only 10 per cent for commerce students, 27 per cent for arts students and 43 per cent for science students. Why did the Prime Minister mislead the parliament?

Eric Abetz (Tasmania, Liberal Party, Minister for Employment) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Of course the Prime Minister did not mislead the parliament. If there is one exemplar of misleading the parliament it is Senator Kim Carr himself. I suggest that that is not a strong suit for Senator Carr to seek to bring to the parliament. What the Prime Minister said is that the figure is on average. As we know, on average means that some will be lower and some will be higher. That is what 'average' means. Every single Australian knows that. But, of course, what Senator Carr seeks to do, very mischievously, is to extrapolate that to every single example and that is not able to be done if you are honest.

Kim Carr (Victoria, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister Assisting the Leader for Science) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr President, I rise on a point of order going to relevance. The Prime Minister did not say 'on average 50 per cent'; he said '50 per cent'.

Stephen Parry (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Carr that is not relevance; that is debating the point.

Eric Abetz (Tasmania, Liberal Party, Minister for Employment) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

What the Australian people also know is that the average university graduate has the benefit of earning an extra $1 million over their lifetime that those without university degrees will not be able to achieve. What the Labor Party are saying, allegedly the representatives of the workers, is that the truck drivers out there without a university degree and the farm workers out there without a university degree should continue to pay taxes to subsidise young people to go to university so that they can earn $1 billion more in their lifetime than those who do not go to university. What we are doing is restoring balance and longevity, and ensuring that our universities will be world competitive. Day after day as universities and— (Time expired)

Kim Carr (Victoria, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister Assisting the Leader for Science) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr President, I ask a supplementary question. Under the government's plan, at how many other universities will students have to pay more than 50 per cent of their university education, contrary to the Prime Minister's assurance?

Eric Abetz (Tasmania, Liberal Party, Minister for Employment) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

As the honourable senator knows, no student will actually have to pay until such time as they earn over $50,000 per annum. That is a very important consideration. Knowing that these people, once they are earning over $50,000 per annum, are likely—

Claire Moore (Queensland, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Women) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr President, I rise on a point of order on direct relevance. The minister has had half his time for this answer. The specific question was about the number of universities where students would pay more than 50 per cent. The minister has not moved towards that question.

Stephen Parry (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I remind the minister of the question. He has 34 seconds left to answer the question.

Eric Abetz (Tasmania, Liberal Party, Minister for Employment) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

What I sought to do was to clarify that the premise of the senator's question is false because they do not pay for their university degrees; they pay afterwards, after they receive a salary of $50,000 per annum.

Claire Moore (Queensland, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Women) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr President, I rise on a point of order, again, on direct relevance. Allowing for the minister's argument, the question was quite clear about the volume of 50 per cent. It is not about what the payment is for and it is not about how you define payment; it is about the quantum of 50 per cent.

Stephen Parry (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The question also included how many other universities and that was at the commencement of the question. The minister has 13 seconds left to answer the question. I remind him of the question.

Eric Abetz (Tasmania, Liberal Party, Minister for Employment) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

As those opposite should know, universities are still in the process of setting their fees and therefore trying to determine which universities are going to charge how much is not known to anybody, and Senator Carr should know that. (Time expired)

Kim Carr (Victoria, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister Assisting the Leader for Science) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr President, I ask a further supplementary question. Minister, how many universities will charge students in such a way that they will have to pay more than 50 per cent of their university education, contrary to the Prime Minister's assurance? Is the Prime Minister's assurance just another broken promise being developed by this dishonest government?

Eric Abetz (Tasmania, Liberal Party, Minister for Employment) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The very short answer is no. In relation to the outrageous allegation of dishonesty, all I suggest to Senator Carr is have a look in the mirror and say, 'No carbon tax.'