David Shoebridge (NSW, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I move:

That the Migration Amendment (Visa Application Charges) Regulations 2024, made under the Migration Act 1958, be disallowed [F2024L00790].

The Labor government is basically using multicultural diaspora communities in this country as cash cows. It is squeezing money from families trying to build a life here and from students trying to get an education, only to turn around and slap them in the face. If you reduce the people who come to Australia and build their lives and communities here to a dollar figure, they become expendable and then they become dehumanised and then it's a pathway towards breakdown in social cohesion. But that's what Labor is doing—gouging hundreds of millions of dollars more from people seeking a better life in Australia than from multinational fossil fuel corporations that export our wealth and drive climate chaos.

Last year the Labor government took some $3.3 billion in visa fees, and they're predicting, in the budget papers, that that will ramp up to $4.4 billion by 2027-28. That is $4.4 billion from people seeking to come here to be part of a family or to perform work. That is $4.4 billion from multicultural communities. And how much are they taking through the major bank levy? $1.6 billion. How much is Labor taking through the luxury car tax? $1.3 billion. How much through the petroleum resource rent tax? $1.1 billion. Vastly more is being gouged out of multicultural Australia through these visa fee increases than through those three tax streams combined.

People trying to get their parents a visa to Australia can pay over $40,000 in fees to bring mum and dad over, to complete the family. Some of the waiting lists and times are disgraceful. It can take 10, 20 or sometimes 30 years to bring your parents to the country. It's a tragic reality for many families that their parents die on the waiting list before they can be brought to this country—and they've paid tens and tens of thousands of dollars for it. That's Labor's approach to visas and immigration. It is a disgraceful, disrespectful policy.

In that regard, Labor is continuing with almost exactly the policy settings given to them by the coalition. I don't want to let the coalition off the hook. The coalition created this horrible, dehumanising mess with the price gouging of multicultural communities. But the real tragedy here is Labor has come in and doubled down on it. The reason we're bringing forward this disallowance motion is Labor has ramped up so many visa fees. The worst of it is the extraordinary fee increases they're proposing for students; my colleague Senator Faruqi will deal with that in detail, as she has publicly. She has proudly made the case against those appalling attacks from the Albanese government.

Let me repeat: if you are trying to get an aged-parent visa—that is the visa you specifically get when your mum and dad are in their last years and you're trying to look after them and they may not have support in the country they're currently living in; the bulk of their family may be here. For brothers and sisters who come together to bring their parents to the country for their last few years, it costs tens of thousands of dollars and they face waiting times that, we're told in answers to questions on notice, are in the order of 29 years. That's not a humane system. That's not a human system. That's a brutal price gouge from multicultural Australia. You would have thought the extremely high fees that this government is gouging from migrant communities would help with the processing, the numbers and the times, but you'd be wrong.

Since 2020-21, the number of staff has barely moved and people are being charged more. There are no additional staff and the timeframes are extending. It's like a double whammy, a double insult, to multicultural Australia. The government has said that, apart from the massive increases in student fees, 'Don't worry, the rest of these changes only match CPI.' We've run the calculator over these numbers, and that's plainly untrue. This Labor government is putting above-CPI increases on visa charges like for the orphan relative visa—to bring out an orphaned child. With these changes, the cost of that visa has gone well above the CPI increase.

What government wants to profit from orphaned children? Answer: the Albanese government. Even the explanatory memorandum from this department is not true and can't be trusted. I ask again: what government wants to price-gouge off orphaned children? I give you the answer again. The Albanese Labor government is doing that. Is there any wonder we're moving to disallow these regulations?

I look forward to seeing how the government justifies this attack on something that's so important to a successful multicultural community—the ability for families to be brought together in this country. It's a genuine pathway for Mum and Dad to come here and complete the family or to bring that child that doesn't have parents anymore into an extended family to get the love and support that they need. Please explain how you justify the price gouging of these families and these communities. Please tell us why this is right, because I can't understand it and I know that the communities I'm out talking to in my home state—in places like Western Sydney—and around this country, can't understand it. They see the delays, the fees, the costs, the disrespect and the way in which they never get an answer from the department. Their application goes in. It could have gone in last century and they still wouldn't be getting answers. Their emails are not returned. Their phone calls aren't answered. There's no-one to talk to. Please explain how that works.

I commend the motion to the chamber and I commend the spirit of multiculturalism to the Labor government. It's not just about turning up at a festival and eating some novel food; it's about actually listening to what multicultural communities are saying. Listen to what families are telling you and answer with some decency and humanity. Don't gouge more out of these communities than you do out of resource giants or the luxury car tax. Be a government with a human face.

Anne Urquhart (Tasmania, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The government does not support this disallowance motion. The Migration Amendment (Visa Application Charges) Regulations 2024 provide for the regular indexation of visa application fees and for a one-off increase in the fee for student visas from $710 to $1,600. This increase reflects the increasing value of education in Australia and reflects the Albanese government's commitment to restoring integrity in the international education sector.

The increase will also help fund a number of important initiatives in education and migration, including measures recommended by the Universities Accord: making HECS fairer and delivering paid prac and fee-free uni-ready courses. Measures in the vocational education and training sector include financial support for apprentices and their employers and the ongoing implementation of the migration strategy.

Claire Chandler (Tasmania, Liberal Party, Shadow Assistant Minister for Foreign Affairs) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

On behalf of the opposition I want to place on record that we will not be supporting the disallowance motion of Senator Shoebridge this afternoon. As Senator Urquhart has already outlined, the proposed motion would disallow 199 visa fee increases from the regular indexation of visa fees, and all but one have gone up a small amount.

But I did want to draw the attention of those in the chamber to the fact that there was a significant fee increase to one visa this year. The government increased the fee for international students from $710,000 to $1,600 on 1 July 2024.

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

Senator Chandler, I think you might need to reread that number into the record. It's $710—

Claire Chandler (Tasmania, Liberal Party, Shadow Assistant Minister for Foreign Affairs) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Yes—$710 was increased to $1,600 on 1 July. Goodness me! This is why I'm not I'm government, because I would have just made visas incredibly expensive! Thank you, Madam Acting Deputy President. As I said, the government increased the fee for international students from $710—

Anne Urquhart (Tasmania, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

That's what I said.

Claire Chandler (Tasmania, Liberal Party, Shadow Assistant Minister for Foreign Affairs) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

exactly what you said, Senator Urquhart—to $1,600 on 1 July 2024.

It's worth noting that the government did not give prior notice of this fee increase and that there hasn't been an explanation for this increase made available to the media. This occurred when the then Minister for Home Affairs, Ms O'Neil; the then Minister for Immigration, Citizenship and Multicultural Affairs, Mr Giles; as well as the Minister for Education and the Minister for Skills and Training put out a media release on Monday 1 July 2024 announcing the increase.

In contrast to this, the Leader of the Opposition, Mr Dutton, said in his budget reply speech that, when in government, we:

… will enhance the integrity of the student visa program by introducing a tiered approach to increasing the student visa application fee and applying it to foreign students who change providers.

I think there is a very clear contrast between what the current opposition will do when in government and what is occurring in the government currently. We want to front up and tell the Australian public what we intend to do, and that is, as I said, in stark contrast to the government, who put out a media release on the day that the indexation occurred by a significant amount, from $710 to $1,600, and won't then front the media to explain that increase or go to the public to explain their policy.

As I said, on behalf of the opposition, we will not be supporting Senator Shoebridge's disallowance motion here this afternoon.

Mehreen Faruqi (NSW, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise to speak to the disallowance of the Migration Amendment (Visa Application Charges) Regulations 2024, and I associate myself with the comments made by Senator Shoebridge. It's another week in parliament and yet another week of this Labor government exploiting, while at the same time scapegoating, migrants and international students. It's not a surprise that the Liberals are on a joint ticket with them when it comes to squeezing migrants and international students even more.

What a cruel measure to be proposing at this time—jacking up visa application fees for international students by 125 per cent. And how are they doing it? They're doing it by sneaking it in in a routine annual amendment that increases all visas fees in line with the CPI. Well, the CPI is 3.8 per cent, so how on earth can they justify slugging international students with a 125 per cent increase? The truth is they can't. There is no justification, no matter what they say. These fee increases are entirely punitive and designed to stop people from coming here. This is not an education measure; this is a migration policy. They're trying to stop them from coming here unless they are willing to pay exorbitant amounts to do so. There is no end to how they will use international students as cash cows to fill government coffers.

This is a government that lacks courage to stand up to the coal and gas corporations who are destroying our planet. They can't stand up to the price-gouging supermarkets, the profiteering banks and the greedy property developers, but they're always ready to punch down on migrants and international students—and the figures back this up. Research from the Australia Institute, based on previous visa application charges, found that these charges earned the government nearly $3 billion more than the petroleum resource rent tax. That is disgraceful!

It is clear that Labor simply does not care about migrants and international students or their wellbeing. They don't care about the stress and anxiety they are causing to hundreds of thousands of people in this country. They don't care, because, conveniently for Labor, international students and visa applicants can't vote. To Labor, like the coalition, international students and migrants are political footballs to be kicked around when it suits them.

Two years ago, Labor and the coalition were desperate for international students to return to help revive the economy after the COVID lockdowns, and, after they had been disgustingly left completely high and dry, without any support, during COVID by the coalition government, they were actually told by the then prime minister Scott Morrison that it was time for them to go home, and now they're the scapegoats for the Albanese government's complete failure to tackle the housing crisis.

They think that we can't see what they are up to with their race-baiting and dirty tactics. Well, I'm here to tell you that we can see right through this terrible agenda. The treatment of international students is despicable. And millions of Australians see through you as well; that's why your polls are falling. We see these games that you are playing, using international students and migrants as pawns. We see you doing nothing to fix the housing or rental crises, because you're in bed with property developers, and we see the racist dog-whistling and shameful attempts to blame people of colour for your own policy failures—and we will call it out. We will call it out every single time, because the consequences of this dog-whistling are dire.

We saw just over the weekend a disgusting Neo-Nazi rally in Brisbane. No doubt, they were emboldened by the racist antimigrant riots in the UK. We've seen across this country a massive spike, though, in Islamophobia. We're seeing a rise in far-right extremism. So connect the dots. You should be able to see that the dog-whistling inflames racism and that it targets and smears migrants and international students and feeds white supremacy.

International students are being attacked from every angle. It was revealed in April that, because of ministerial direction 107, universities were rejecting applications from entire countries—entire countries!—namely, India, Nepal and Pakistan, because of concerns about the impact on the universities' risk rating. But in reality this is just unfair, harmful and discriminatory. That's what it comes down to.

The government has also made changes to temporary graduate visas, to age eligibility, to onshore applications and to visa application processes, leading to an environment for prospective and current students that is both uncertain and unwelcoming. Now, on top of all of this, we have a whopping increase in visa processing fees that more than doubles the current costs. These fees apply to students whether they come here for a two-week English cost or a four-year honours degree—or even if their visa applications are rejected.

The attacks on international students, though, don't stop there, because now we have the attempted introduction of enrolment caps for international students, from a government desperate to point the finger at anyone to cover up its absolute failure to address the housing and rental crisis. There is absolutely no evidence that links international students with the housing or rental crisis. Students have spoken to me about how that is making them feel, and I have heard that many students are already reconsidering their decision to study in Australia, given the uncertainty and unwelcoming attitude of the current government.

The President of the Flinders University Student Association, an international student himself, told the inquiry into the ESOS bill that the government's measures over the past 12 months:

… sends a strong message to the world that international students are not welcome here. Moreover, introduction of these caps, especially at public institutions, sends a message that genuine international students in Australia are a mere commodity.

… am I a commodity or a fellow human being with dreams and hopes, who just wants a fair go?

That's what international students are feeling—completely dehumanised.

International students pay astronomical fees, yet face bias and discrimination. The Labor government would be better off focusing on making our higher education system fairer and more equitable, instead of repeatedly targeting international students because of its policy failures. The government is determined to let international students and migrants be the scapegoats in its race to the bottom with the opposition leader on migration, and that is a real shame.

It is so hypocritical of the Labor Party to lecture all of us about social cohesion while making life harder and harder for so many migrants, people of colour and their families. You just want to silence us, don't you? You want us to put our heads down and do all the hard work that no-one else wants to do, but you will do nothing for us except squeeze us for more and more. Well, people have really had enough.

I know both the Labor Party and the Liberals have already indicated that they won't support this disallowance motion. Sadly, that doesn't come as a surprise to me. But I urge everyone else who thinks migrants and international students deserve better—and they do indeed deserve much better—to vote for this disallowance. Again I say that, sadly, in this chamber I don't hold out much hope.

Nick McKim (Tasmania, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Well, here we go again. I say, 'Here we go again,' because it's critical that we see this particular move by a Labor government in the context of Australia's history: the things that have come before today in terms of the colonialisation of this country, the displacement and racism faced by First Nations people in this country, and the racism that to this very day is experienced by far too many migrants to Australia.

I had some conversations just last week, in my home state of Tasmania, with some of the leaders of the many multicultural communities who choose to make their home in Tasmania, and they were very clear to me about the dangers of being someone who is obviously from a different country or a different culture. They spoke about how they have faced increased violence, increased racially motivated attacks and increased racism over recent times, and they were very clear about the reasons that these racist attacks and increases in racism were occurring. They said to me, 'Nick, it's because of the public comments made by people like Senator Pauline Hanson and the Leader of the Opposition, Mr Dutton.'

They asked me to come into this place and call that behaviour out, so that's what I'm going to do tonight. I'm going to call that behaviour out. That is not acceptable from Senator Hanson, who built a political career on demonising people from Asia and has now shifted her focus to target Muslim people. It is not acceptable, and the Greens and I are calling it out. My great friend Senator Mehreen Faruqi has done an amazing job in calling it out, but Senator Faruqi shouldn't have to call this out, because it shouldn't be happening.

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

Senator McKim, I just want to remind you that imputation would be crossing a bridge that might not be appropriate. Passion in speech is a good thing. I just ask that you take care with your language. You have the call, Senator McKim.

Nick McKim (Tasmania, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Thank you, Acting Deputy President O'Neill. Who can forget the opposition leader, Mr Dutton, warning about these so-called Sudanese gangs that were allegedly roaming around Melbourne? Mr Dutton was saying, 'People are scared to go out and have dinner in Melbourne because of Sudanese gangs.' Then Victoria Police came out and said, 'Actually, there are no Sudanese gangs in Melbourne,' and what did Mr Dutton do? Did he do what any normal, decent person would do—retract and apologise? No. He doubled down.

What Mr Dutton and Senator Hanson need to understand is that their words give permission for people out in the Australian community to engage in racism. Whether that is in words or actions, up to and including violence motivated by racism, none of those things are acceptable. Enabling them or implicitly encouraging them is not acceptable either and must be called out every time that it happens.

The truth is that far too many Australians face this kind of racism. They face it far too often and they face it in far too many elements of their lives. It has to end, and a great place to begin ending that structural racism that exists in our society would be if people who get up in this place and either explicitly or implicitly encourage that racism were to stop—just stop.

This particular instrument that the Greens are seeking to disallow today increases visa application fees. International student visa application fees are going to increase by 125 per cent, as Senator Faruqi has already informed the chamber. In the context of an election campaign that I fear is going to be based in significant part on the demonising of migrants and multicultural communities in this country, this increase is a very unwise move by a Labor Party that is all about social cohesion when it suits it. They are all about social cohesion, yet they don't want to talk about the fact that they are complicit in a genocide in Gaza. It's all about social cohesion, but they don't seem to worry too much about social cohesion when they are talking about jacking up visa fees in the context of the upcoming election campaign.

Make no mistake, it is absolutely obvious to anyone who is paying attention that part of Mr Dutton's strategy in this campaign is going to be to blame migrants for as many of the challenges facing us here in Australia as he can. If you can't get in for a hip operation, blame migrants. If housing prices are too high and there are not enough homes available, blame migrants. If there is a pothole in the road outside your house, blame the migrants driving down the road. That's what we're going to get from Mr Dutton. It is blindingly obvious. He is going to weaponise Australia's multicultural communities. He is going to weaponise migration levels to this country, and he's going to do it because he thinks that's one of his pathways to power. Well, Mr Dutton and anyone else on that side of the chamber who's going to try that on needs to understand that they're going to be fought every step of the way by the Australian Greens because we are going to stand up for multicultural Australia. We are going to stand up for the amazing contribution that migrants have made, continue to make to this day and will continue to make into the future in this country. We are going to stand up, and we are going to fight against the kind of divisive, harmful rhetoric that has already started from the opposition and which no doubt will continue.

Of course, the Labor Party are not going to stand and fight proudly against that. In fact, they are going to start appeasing it, and they've done that already by cutting back on migration levels into Australia. That's because they don't want to fight Mr Dutton on that turf. They would prefer not to have a fight, and, in the time honoured way of the Labor Party, they're going to capitulate, roll over and let Mr Dutton tickle their collective bellies, as we've seen happen so many times on so many issues. The country therefore lurches further to the Right. The Greens are here to fight for people. We are here to fight for multiculturalism, and we are here to fight for a fair go for migrants.

When you place this in other contexts recently, it is yet another sad day in our country's national story. I went to Manus Island five times, and I know my friend and colleague Senator Hanson-Young visited Nauru. We saw firsthand the human cost of Australia's racist offshore detention system. I call it racist because—how many white people ended up on Manus Island? I didn't visit Nauru, because, on the instructions of the Australian government, the Nauru government refused me a visa. But I went to Manus Island five times, and I can tell you absolutely, without any doubt whatsoever, how many white people there were locked up in Manus Island: none. If a boatload of white South African farmers had happened to arrive in Australia during the time when that shameful policy was in place, I have no doubt the answer would have been the same: none. They would not have ended up on Manus Island, because they were white. It was okay to put the brown-skinned and the black-skinned people on Manus Island, but it would never have been okay to put a white-skinned person on Manus Island. That was a racist policy. We need to call that out.

This country has got a shameful history of being a racist country, back from the days when it was open and explicit, with the White Australia Policy, through to today—a shameful history of racism. And you can't do something like this, like what the government is trying to do, without understanding the historical context of this country and doing your best to understand what this does in that context. So we are going to stand up and fight. We are moving to disallow this, and I thank Senator Shoebridge for moving this disallowance. It is time for a reckoning in this country about our history, about the displacement of First Nations people from their country under the lie of terra nullius. It is time for a reckoning about the failure to get up a voice in this country and about Labor's current failure to proceed with Makarrata in the terms that it was conceived of in the Uluru statement. It is time for a reckoning about our racist history as a country. Until we have those reckonings—and that must include a treaty or treaties with First Nations people—we will still have massive unfinished business as a country; we will still have a hole in our collective hearts.

Sarah Hanson-Young (SA, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise to contribute to this debate and associate myself with the comments made by my Greens colleagues here. You know there's an election coming when the race baiting really starts heating up. You know there's an election coming when the Leader of the Opposition, rather than focusing on what he will do to help relieve the cost-of-living pressures on everyday Australians, goes for the lazy option, the low option and the heartless option of attacking refugees.

Mr Dutton's comments this morning, deliberately used to inflame division, hatred and fear, are despicable, are racist and are unbecoming of anyone who wants to become this nation's Prime Minister. But, of course, that's all Mr Peter Dutton has. He doesn't have a plan for reducing the cost of living for Australians. He doesn't have a plan for making sure childcare workers get paid better. He doesn't have a plan for making sure supermarkets stop gouging at the checkout. He doesn't have a plan to stop rents rising. He doesn't have a plan to fund our universities so that our kids can get a decent education without having mountains of debt. He doesn't have a plan for making sure that people can go to the doctor and not have to pay through the nose. He doesn't have a plan for making sure you can go to the dentist and afford it or ensure that your kid can get the help they need if they're struggling with their mental health. No, he doesn't have a plan for any of this. He doesn't actually care. He wants to take the lazy, the nasty and the fearful option, and that is to inflame divisions in this country, to blame migrants, to beat up on refugees and to incite a debate about whether people facing war and persecution should be given sanctuary and safety.

Of course, unlike a government that might have a spine to stand up against this, we see the Labor Party going weak at the knees and rolling out soft-ball policy after soft-ball policy that echo some of that dog whistling. That's why we're moving this disallowance today—because of the message it sends. This move to put the hardship and burden on the migrants coming to this country plays into that exhibition of fear and hatred displayed by Mr Dutton.

There has not been an opportunity to race-bait that Mr Dutton hasn't taken. He'll never miss an opportunity to whip up fear and hatred. So why does the Labor government keep giving him the opportunity?

Mr Dutton is leading the nasty party. That's for sure. And the only book they've got to play in this election is blaming migrants, refugees and people fleeing war and persecution for all of the problems, which of course is ludicrous. It's wrong. Where is the opposition's debate this week in the parliament? We haven't been here for five or six weeks. Rather than having a debate about tackling the cost of living, we have the Leader of the Opposition wanting to whip up racist fearmongering. He's not blowing the dog whistle; he's blowing the foghorn, and there will be more of it as we get closer and closer to this election. The foghorn of racism and fearmongering will get louder, and I implore the Labor Party: don't fall for his nasty tricks. Don't fall for it. Don't get sucked in by the hatred of the nasty party, of the laziness of the race baiters, of the fear mongering, of a party that has never ever under the leadership of Peter Dutton stood up for our proud, multicultural society, our community. He wants us to be divided. Don't fall for the nasty party's nasty tricks.

David Pocock (ACT, Independent) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise in support of this disallowance motion moved by Senator Shoebridge. Education is the ACT's biggest export. It contributes $1 billion to our local economy annually, and international education was responsible for half of the national GDP growth in Australia last year. More importantly, these students enrich our community immeasurably. Our universities have done the right thing over the years in the ACT; they have built extra student accommodation.

As a result of the government changes which are subject to this disallowance, Australia now has the highest student visa fees in the world. I had a lot of feedback from universities, and we have five here in the ACT, about the risks and negative consequences from this fee hike, alongside other policy changes such as ministerial directive 107, which is frankly a disastrous way to deal with net overseas migration. What a sham of a policy. Of course, the proposed ESOS legislation currently seems to be rather friendless.

It seems a bit rich to increase almost all visa application fees at time when processing timelines have blown out in such an extraordinary way. Sure, if you're getting a better service, maybe you will pay a bit more. If you're getting it back quicker, most people might be willing to spend a little bit more, but to hike up the fees at the same time you are on this go-slow when it comes to processing means students who are doing all the right things—applying for their course, paying top-dollar to attend an Australian university—are sometimes arriving in week 2, 3, 4 or 5 and some are just giving up, saying, 'This is too hard. I will go somewhere else.'

We cannot take international students for granted and assume they will choose Australia for their study. Yes, our universities are some of the best in the world, but students obviously have other options. There are many competitors out there. I looked at some of the visa application fees of some of these other countries. In Canada, a student visa costs the equivalent of a whopping A$165. In France, it is exactly the same. New Zealand is a bit more, the equivalent of A$344; Hong Kong, A$190; and Germany, A$180. The most expensive fees I could find were in the US at about A$770 and in the United Kingdom at A$950.

These regulations increase the costs of applying for a student visa in Australia from a vaguely competitive $710 to $1,600—that is, a $1,600 non-refundable fee. It really doesn't make sense to me. The ABS says the value of international students in Australia was $48 billion last year. After a more than decade of underfunding by successive governments, our universities have made a plan. Many of them have decided, 'We're not getting funded for research, so we need to find funding elsewhere.' So they've gone to the international student market and developed courses, and we now have the international student market as it is today. But government policy has forced them to do that—to find money elsewhere, to cross subsidise research and to cross subsidise some courses for domestic students.

Now we're turning around—rather than saying: 'We've got a bit of a problem here. We're running into a problem with housing and potentially with social licence. Let's come up with a plan to turn this around.' You'd think that there'd be a sensible conversation about how, over the next five to 10 years, we work with universities when it comes to funding models, to research funding and to on-campus accommodation. Instead, we see this ministerial directive 107, which is basically just putting on the go-slow. Rather than having an upfront conversation with universities, you're just stopping them from getting students, because they can't even get a visa after paying an outrageous fee.

We should be recognising and celebrating the huge contribution to our economy and the value that international students bring to our learning environments. Instead, this government is launching a sustained attack on the financial sustainability of our universities and using international students as scapegoats, rather than having the hard conversations around migration. I have people raise these questions with me: As a country, how big do we want to get? What are the trade-offs? How is it impacting housing? What are the trade-offs in terms of ecological health of the landscape for cities to continue to grow? People have, I think, very legitimate concerns, but let's have that conversation as a country and as communities. Let's come up with a plan, rather than this reactive, almost farcical, approach and this focus on net overseas migration and this scapegoating of universities.

I don't think it is useful, and it's certainly not anywhere near a long-term sustainable approach that would allow Australian universities to maintain their reputation as world leading and as a place that is welcoming for international students. You can't force, through government policies from both sides, universities to go after the international student market and then suddenly pull the rug out from under them.

Surely we can do better, and I support this disallowance of these regulations.

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

The question is that the motion moved by Senator Shoebridge be agreed to.