Deborah O'Neill (NSW, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I move:

That the Senate take note of the answer given by the Minister for Employment (Senator Abetz) to a question without notice asked by Senator Carr today relating to higher education.

What we heard today should alarm every single family and every single person in this country interested in the benefits of higher education for this nation. What we heard unabashedly declared by Minister Abetz when he was asked about this next change in policy for higher ed was, 'Yes, we are committed to deregulation.' He said it again today; it is clearly on the record. In that commitment to deregulation, he is representing a government that is committed to removing the opportunities for hundreds of thousands of Australians to access universities and degrees, and the opportunities that that will present for them and this country.

Make no mistake: we have had mark I of their disgraceful higher education 'reform' package. We have had mark II of their destruction of the higher education sector. This is now mark III. It is the same for all intents and purposes, approved by that great triumvirate now of Mr Abbott, Mr Hockey and Mr Pyne—the three of them colluding to take away the future of young people and mature age students in this country who want to access higher education. Today, they have come out with their tricky campaign for No. 3, the third go at trying to get this disgraceful piece of legislation through the parliament. This time they are going to split it apart so it looks a little different. I used to try to hide the vegetables in the cooking that I did for my kids by camouflaging it, but in the end they were able to figure out that I was hiding the vegetables. This government think they can camouflage the same package by presenting it in a different shape. This time they have 20 per cent cuts. They are trying to pretend those cuts are off the table, but they are absolutely a part of their package. They also say that they are still committed to deregulation. With those two things, they create the context for $100,000 degrees.

On 6 March we heard evidence in the Senate Education and Employment References Committee about exactly how destructive and chaotic this government is—not only with their legislation but with the absolutely disgraceful way they have tried to bully the Senate. They are holding to ransom an entire sector of the Australian education and innovation industry. The National Collaborative Research Infrastructure Strategy, or NCRIS, has some of the best and brightest in the country. We heard from a number of representatives of key elements of NCRIS, including Professor Goodnow. People in the gallery and people listening to this debate today would know about the great work being done in genomics and immunotherapy. Professor Goodnow told us about the time he spends at Westmead's children's hospital and in particular about one young boy—how they were able to find out that this boy had a mutation of a single element of his entire genetic blueprint.

Professor Goodnow explained how critical the work was. He said:

… it depends on: being able to bring together the doctors in the hospital and in the university sector with big DNA genome sequences, which is NCRIS; having big pipelines for moving huge files of data around, which is NCRIS; having experts to run that through the biggest supercomputer in the southern hemisphere, which is NCRIS; being able to model that in a laboratory in mice, which is NCRIS; and then bringing that together with all of the pharmaceutical development and biotech, which is NCRIS.

That is the kind of work this institution is doing, along with a lot of other fantastic and innovative scientific work. That is the institution that this shameful government—the shameful triumvirate of Mr Hockey, Mr Pyne and Mr Abbott—want to put over a barrel. They are threatening to take away NCRIS's $150 million in funding in order to get the Senate to vote for their disgraceful higher education bill.

They are a desperate government. The chaos they are trying to inflict not only on the scientific community but on the higher education sector is writ large in everything they are doing this week. This backflip—another one from a government that cannot deliver what they said they would but who have instead delivered a shameful list of travesties—shows that they simply do not understand the damage they are inflicting on the country. We have had many representations from people in the sector telling us that we need to stand firm with Australians who believe in higher education. Labor will never abandon those Australians. (Time expired)

Ian Macdonald (Queensland, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I proffer to the Labor Party some advice—and the advice is this:

The Senate is holding back Australia's future. Only bipartisanship can end the nonsense. Australia will be left behind if the funding reforms do not proceed. All it takes is putting aside politics and putting Australia first.

I do not claim to be the author of that advice. That advice came from a former premier of my state of Queensland, the Hon. Peter Beattie, a man who has quite some history in relation to university reform.

Government Senators:

Government senators interjecting—

Ian Macdonald (Queensland, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

He was, as my colleagues point out, a Labor Premier of Queensland. Mr Beattie is proffering that advice, which I pass on to Senator O'Neill and other members of the Labor Party. I urge those members of the Labor Party to understand what experienced people like Mr Beattie say about university reform.

If Senator O'Neill and other Labor Party senators are not terribly enamoured with Mr Beattie's advice, I refer them to the advice of some other prominent Australians. There is Mr Gareth Evans. People who have been in this chamber as long as I have—

Senator Conroy interjecting—

will remember when Gareth Evans, then Senator the Hon. Gareth Evans, was Leader of the Government—the then Labor government—in the Senate. Former Senator Evans is quite open these days about his support for university deregulation. I did not quite get Senator Conroy's interjection—

Stephen Conroy (Victoria, Australian Labor Party, Deputy Leader of the Opposition in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I said you are the only one who was here then!

Ian Macdonald (Queensland, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I thought it must have been something about Mr Evans no longer being in your Victorian faction, Senator Conroy. But Mr Evans is certainly very clear about his views on university reform. I also refer doubters and those from the Labor side of the Senate who might contribute in this debate to the urgings of Mr John Dawkins. Mr John Dawkins is often referred to as the father of university reform in Australia. Notwithstanding, from my point of view, that he was a Labor minister as well, his advice in relation to university reform is certainly advice I would urge my colleagues opposite to take some notice of. I could continue going on and on. There are not only senior people in the education system but senior people in the Labor Party who are pleading with the Labor Party to do the right thing by Australia and allow these reforms through. I will complete this section of my speech by referring my Labor colleagues opposite to the words of Maxine McKew, the former Labor member for Bennelong. Again, she is one of those who understands higher education and she is urging the Labor Party to get out of the way—to do something positive for Australia and allow this university reform to go through.

The Labor Party are simply running some of their traditional scare campaigns. There are many of them going around. The scare campaign on fees is false. Labor senators should know that fees already announced by the University of Western Australia, the Queensland University of Technology and the Australian Catholic University show that universities will be reasonable. No one needs to pay a cent up-front or pay back anything until they are earning $50,000 or more a year. What has been shown is that the universities are sensibly addressing the issues of fees so that they can make university education available to all Australians and, importantly, to ensure that the universities have the funds to make Australia's university system a world-class system, not one where Labor wants— (Time expired)

Catryna Bilyk (Tasmania, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I too rise to take note today and debate the fairly disappointing answers given by Senator Abetz to questions by Senator Carr. Senator Abetz's answers were evasive and certainly failed to address the substance of this issue. They were pretty disappointing and typical of the cavalier attitude that the Abbott government has to this place, Labor, the crossbench senators and the Australian people.

It is common knowledge that only through education will Australia be fully developed to our economic potential, our scientific potential and, in fact, our people's potential. So why is the Prime Minister and Minister Pyne continuing to try to cut money from higher education? Why are they trying to destroy the higher education system? Labor will vote against cuts to university funding and student support. We will vote against them and we will not support a system of higher fees, bigger student debt, reduced access and greater inequality. We will never, ever agree that education should only be available if you have the capacity to pay.

Since the budget, we have seen that it is not only Labor that opposes the government's unfair and short-sighted higher education package; Australians overall oppose them. They oppose cuts of up to 37 per cent to public funding for undergraduate courses. We hear from the other side that university fees are not going to rise, but we know that that is not true. If you look around the world, there are examples—like in the UK—where university fees have risen substantially for people. Those on the other side need to take full account of what is happening in other places.

Lots of us have children, grandchildren, nieces, nephews and young people we know. We want to see them have the same opportunities that we have been able to have. Maybe some of us have not had that opportunity, but we still want to see that opportunity for the next generation to pursue their education at Australia's best universities without facing crippling debt. It is pretty amazing that today Minister Pyne had to make another embarrassing backflip. It is pretty hard for anybody to keep track of where the government is at in regard to higher education.

Stephen Conroy (Victoria, Australian Labor Party, Deputy Leader of the Opposition in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Another backflip!

Catryna Bilyk (Tasmania, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Yes, another one, Senator Conroy. It is pretty hard for people to keep up on where the government is at. Minister Pyne had to make a backflip on the bullying tactics of trying to hold the scientific community as hostages to get the higher education package through. That was an obviously wonderful strategy that somebody had come up with on that side! They really backflipped. It really was not going to work for them. The crossbenchers in particular were very angry about that being held to ransom and having the 1,700 jobs of the scientists being held to ransom.

Minister Pyne had threatened funding for 1,700 research jobs unless members of this place voted through his unfair $100,000 degrees and 20 per cent cuts to university funding. The minister threatened to absolutely destroy Australia's research sector unless this place made his petty, cruel cuts to higher education. He had to backflip. Yet again, it is another backdown by the government. They go in there and they have these thought bubbles. I doubt they are discussing it with themselves, because members of the Senate backbench were very upset by this happening. We even had Senator Bernardi saying that move appeared counterproductive. I do not know who they are talking to on that side. I would suggest that they do a lot more talking to a lot more people and that they stop having these rushes of blood to the brain where they think that they can bully people and intimidate people. They had to back down on the GP tax and now they have had to back down from reducing funding.

The funding was already there; that funding was already in the forward estimates. There was 21 months' worth of funding left there when the government came to power. They should have been able to make sure that funding was continuing without having to threaten or cajole— (Time expired)

Christopher Back (WA, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

It is a shame that the people in the gallery were not there for Senator O'Neill's contribution earlier, when she was speaking with great eloquence and great passion about the $150 million that is now being removed under the National Collaborative Research Infrastructure Strategy. We have just heard Senator Bilyk going on about this $150 million being carved out of the budget. Unfortunately for those who were in the gallery earlier, they will not hear this news: do you know what the then Labor government had done with the $150 million? They had cut it out completely. They had removed the $150 million. There was nothing. There was zip. The bucket was empty.

I congratulate Senator Abetz on his response to Senator Carr's question, when he actually read out a document provided to him by the Minister for Finance. Way back in the budget last year, do you know what the coalition had done? We actually put the $150 million in there. Isn't that amazing?

Catryna Bilyk (Tasmania, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

You are talking nonsense.

Christopher Back (WA, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Isn't it absolutely amazing that people have to listen to Senator Bilyk's nonsense in silence, but we cannot speak without interjection from Senator Bilyk? I will tell you the one person who does need a university education: the shadow minister, Senator Carr. He goes on, as Senator O'Neill did, about $100,000 degrees. I have my shoes and socks on, so I do not need to multiply three years of education at UWA—one of the finest universities in the world—by $16,000. When I was a student, three times 16 actually equalled $48,000—not $100,000. And with a four-year agriculture degree—I do not know whether Senator Bilyk has her calculator out yet—four times 16 is $64,000, not $100,000. Anybody who knows anything about competition knows that happens if there are 20 universities around the place offering a teaching degree with one wanting to charge $100,000 and the others wanting to charge $48,000. Do you know what the market does? The market moves away from the $100,000 degree and goes for the $48,000 degrees. So let us—

Senator Conroy interjecting—

Senator Conroy does, in fact, have an economics degree. I understand that, when he told one of his co-students on one occasion how well he was going to do and how she was going to fail, in fact, she vastly surpassed Senator Conroy in that particular course. But we will not talk about his degree in economics today. What we will do is talk about the opportunities for low-socioeconomic students that will be denied by Labor if they oppose this legislation.

History tells us what will happen. Senator Bilyk raised the UK. When the fee adjustments were made in the UK, the number of low-socioeconomic students attending universities in the UK went up dramatically. The university sector has said that the changes introduced by the coalition will dramatically increase the number of scholarships it can offer to students of low-socioeconomic backgrounds. From my own time as a university lecturer in a regional university in Western Australia, I know very well the opportunities that this legislation brings to regional universities. It will tremendously enhance the opportunity for regional universities in this country.

That is why it is so disappointing that Senator Carr would effectively call nearly every vice-chancellor in this country a liar. He says that there will inevitably be $100,000 degrees, but there will not be. And—heaven forbid!—in the committee inquiries we have had, the non-government based university and higher education sector said that the cost of their programs and degrees will go down. Why? It is because all of a sudden they will have some Commonwealth supported places. The cost of degrees will go down. It does not suit Senator Carr. He does not want to see that sector. He does want to see the sector that produces about 15 per cent of our tertiary qualifications.

This particular group over here will deny the 80,000 students who will have the opportunity to do pre-bachelor courses. Again, I know from my own experience of 15 years as a university lecturer that young people who will not be able to go to uni first off will come into the sector and do a sub-bachelor course. They will find that they enjoy it. They will graduate and they will move into the university sector. Be very careful of what the Labor Party is doing. It is destroying the future opportunities for higher education in this country. (Time expired)

Chris Ketter (Queensland, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise also to make a contribution in respect of the answer Senator Abetz gave to the question from Senator Carr in respect of the higher education mess which this government now appears to be in. Senator Abetz's answer did confirm that this government is still committed to the disgraceful policies which will lead, in my view and in the view of many others, to $100,000 degrees in this country. We should never forget that, at its core, this policy is a fundamental breach of commitments that were given by the now Prime Minister and the education minister prior to and after the election. In fact, it was on 1 September 2013 on the Insiders program that the Prime Minister said there would be 'no cuts to education'. On 17 November 2013, the education minister said, 'We are not going to raise fees.' We should never forget that this is a bill which is based on a lie, walking away from commitments that were given to the Australian people in 2013.

They say that a week is long time in politics. For the education minister, it seems that a day is long time. Yesterday, Mr Pyne, the education minister, was on the Insiders program fighting the good fight. I quote from what he said during the course of that interview:

I think people would give me credit for the fact that I was—never left the battlefield. I always fought right through to the end. And we will fight right through to the vote, which will probably be on Wednesday, for as long as it takes. Now, what we do after that, I'm not contemplating. I'm contemplating victory on Wednesday because it's too important not to win for students and for universities and for Australia.

The education minister seemed to be relishing his imaginary crusade. It appeared to all and sundry that victory was within his grasp. He could smell it and he could taste it. But he seemed unconcerned that 1,700 researchers would lose their jobs as part of the government's approach. He was—and still is—completely unconcerned about the fact that he is shutting down the opportunity for thousands of young Australians to attend university.

As Senator Bilyk has indicated, even his South Australian colleague Senator Bernardi says that the move appears counterproductive. Senator Bernardi went on to say:

Playing games with our scientists and research hasn't seemed to have done the government any favours.

The education minister has retreated from the battlefield, and the researchers are safe for now. This reminds me of the disgraceful situation in which Senator Muir found himself in December of last year when he was the person who cast the final vote that allowed Scott Morrison's controversial asylum seeker laws to pass through the Senate. This is the sort of blackmail and pushed-through-at-any-cost action typical of the Abbott government. The Abbott government is continuing its dedication to taking the fair go out of Australia.

Despite the flip-flopping from the coalition, Labor will vote against these cuts to university funding and student support. Labor will not support a system of higher fees, bigger student debt, reduced access and greater inequality. We will never tell Australians that the quality of their education depends on their capacity to pay. Australians value the role our universities play not just in educating individuals but as contributors to the public good. Our universities are deeply engaged in the global research endeavour, trying to solve the world's thorniest problems, from offering insights into terrorist organisations to curing cancer. Australians know that both research and teaching are important. So, when Christopher Pyne threatens to cut research if he does not get his dud package through the Senate, Australians do not think, 'What a good idea.' They become even angrier that their representatives standing up against broken promises are being subjected to threats and blackmail. Every day, more and more people are waking up to this higher education shambles, realising it is nothing less than a desperate attempt to impose an ideological deregulation agenda that has failed in the UK, that has failed in America— (Time expired)

Question agreed to.