Karen Grogan (SA, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

With the concurrence of the Senate, the statement of reasons accompanying the requests circulated for this bill will be incorporated into the Hansard immediately after the requests to which they relate. There being no objection, it is so ordered.

The committee is considering the Universities Accord (Student Support and Other Measures) Bill 2024 and the amendments on sheet 2949 moved by Senator Faruqi. The question is that the amendments be agreed to.

(Quorum formed)

Anthony Chisholm (Queensland, Australian Labor Party, Assistant Minister for Education) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I am going to provide a government response to Senator Faruqi on 2949. As you would be aware, we are already taking action to provide significant relief to Australian students and workers with student debt. In this bill, we're taking action to cut the cost of degrees through our changes to indexation, and we've also announced that we'll cut 20 per cent of all student debts and that we'll raise the minimum repayment threshold so repayments are lower and kick in when you earn more. This means, all up, the Albanese Labor government will cut close to $20 billion in student loan debt for more than three million Australians.

I note abolishing indexation was considered by the Senate Standing Committee on Education and Employment in 2023. The committee recommended that the Senate not pass that bill. Indexation plays an important role in ensuring that loans maintain their real value over time and reinforces the long-term financial sustainability of the HELP and other loan systems. But that doesn't mean that indexation settings can't be better and fairer. The changes in this bill acknowledge that. They ensure that debts won't grow faster than average wages. If indexation were to be waived altogether, the costs would be in the billions. It would break the system that has seen so many Australians get a university degree. We need more people to go into tertiary education, not fewer, and that's why we will not support this amendment.

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

The Greens are moving this amendment because the students are being burdened by more and more student debt when, really, education should be free.

The committee report that Senator Chisholm refers to obviously came from a Labor dominated committee. But every single witness we heard from gave evidence that indexation should go. It is unfair. In Labor's term of government indexation has gone up by 16 per cent. Just shaving off a few per cent still leaves an 11 per cent increase in student debts over just 2½ years of Labor government.

Student debt really is spiralling. People are being crushed under indexation and student debt, so, really, it should be scrapped altogether. We have a bill sitting in parliament to scrap indexation and to raise the minimum income threshold to the median wage. Senator Chisholm said that Labor are going to wipe 20 per cent of student debt and erase the minimum income threshold, but they don't have the courage to legislate it right now. So we are going to put you on notice tonight. We're going to move amendments and see if Labor support their own policy and pledge. Labor are in government now, and they should legislate for those changes now so there is certainty for those who are being crushed under student debt. I commend the amendments to the Senate.

Karen Grogan (SA, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The question is that Senator Faruqi's amendments on sheet 2949 be agreed to. As a division is required, it will be deferred until a later date because we are past 6.30 pm.

Sarah Henderson (Victoria, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Education) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

by leave—I move opposition amendments (1) and (2) on sheet 3046 together:

(1) Clause 2, page 2 (table item 7), omit the table item.

(2) Schedule 2, page 29 (line 1) to page 31 (line 17), to be opposed.

Anthony Chisholm (Queensland, Australian Labor Party, Assistant Minister for Education) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The government will not be supporting these amendments. Students have been calling for changes to the student services and amenities fees, and it was a recommendation of the Universities Accord. Over a third of universities already meet this requirement. This includes those in Western Australia that are required to provide 50 per cent of SSAF to lead student organisations under WA state legislation. To suggest that unis on the west coast are already above that—we're seeking to legislate—but that other universities cannot achieve 40 per cent is wrong. Transitional arrangements have been included to support those providers that need the time to meet the new requirements. They will be able to write to the secretary of the Department of Education. Table A universities will have up to three years to transition and non-table A providers will have up to five years.

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

Can I confirm that Senator Henderson moved amendments on sheets 3046 and 3047?

The TEMPORARY CHAIR: Just sheet 3046. I will confirm that. Senator Henderson, is that (2) on sheet 3046 or (1)?

Sarah Henderson (Victoria, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Education) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I've moved amendments (1) and (2) on sheet 3046.

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

The Greens will not be supporting this amendment. The student services and amenities fees should be exactly that, and the majority of this revenue should be allocated to student led organisations who are best placed to direct and control their funding as they see fit. Universities must be run by and for their staff and students. Democratically elected student organisations are crucial to this and must be appropriately resourced to respond to student's needs. Any attempts to further erode the power of staff and students must be resisted, and that's why the Greens will not support this amendment. Staff and students should be the ones running universities not a bunch of hand-picked executives that are walking away with hefty pay packets while corporatising universities.

Karen Grogan (SA, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The question is that schedule 2 stand as printed. A division having been called, as it is past 6.30 pm, we will defer that to a later date. We can't do the second one on that sheet because it's reliant upon the first one, so we'll put it to one side while we work through that.

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

by leave—I move Australian Greens amendments (1) and (2) on sheet 3140 together:

(1) Clause 2, page 2 (after table item 6), insert:

(2) Page 28 (after line 10), after Schedule 1, insert:

Schedule 1A — Reduction of AASL, HELP, SSL, FS and VETSL debts

Australian Apprenticeship Support Loans Act 2014

1 At the end of Part 3.1

Add:

38A Rules must discharge an amount of accumulated AASL debts

(1) The rules must provide that an accumulated AASL debt that a person incurs on 1 June 2025 is discharged by 20%.

(2) Rules made for the purposes of subsection (1) have effect despite any other provision of this Act.

Higher Education Support Act 2003

2 At the end of Subdivision 140-C

Add:

140-45 Reduction of accumulated HELP debts on 2 June 2025

(1) If a person incurs an *accumulated HELP debt on 1 June 2025 for that financial year, then, on 2 June 2025, the person's accumulated HELP debt for that financial year is taken to have been discharged by an amount that is worked out in accordance with the following formula:

The amount of the person's accumulated HELP debt on 1 June 2025 x 0.2

(2) Subsection (1) has effect despite any other provision of this Act, other than section 140-30 (which deals with the rounding of amounts).

Social Security Act 1991

3 At the end of Part 2AA.3

Add:

1061ZVEG Minister must discharge an amount of accumulated SSL debts

(1) The Minister must, by legislative instrument, provide that an accumulated SSL debt that a person incurs on 1 June 2025 is discharged by 20%.

(2) An instrument made for the purposes of subsection (1) has effect despite any other provision of this Act.

4 At the end of Part 2B.3

Add:

1061ZZFPA Minister must discharge an amount of accumulated FS debts

(1) The Minister must, by legislative instrument, provide that an accumulated FS debt that a person incurs on 1 June 2025 is discharged by 20%.

(2) An instrument made for the purposes of subsection (1) has effect despite any other provision of this Act.

VET Student Loans Act 2016

5 At the end of Division 3 of Part 3A

Add:

23CG Rules must discharge an amount of accumulated VETSL debts

(1) The rules must provide that an accumulated VETSL debt that a person incurs on 1 June 2025 is discharged by 20%.

(2) Rules made for the purposes of subsection (1) have effect despite any other provision of this Act.

These amendments are about legislating what Labor has pledged recently. That is, to wipe 20 per cent of all student debt. After years of pressure from the Greens, Labor is finally starting to adopt Greens policies by pledging to wipe some student debt but obviously too slowly and too cynically. I say slowly because it's only 20 per cent and I say cynically because they won't do it right now.

Labor has brought in a bill for fee-free TAFE places, and legislating that now is a good thing. But it only starts in 2027. This pledge, to reduce 20 per cent of the student debt when student debt is spiralling, should be legislated right now. There is absolutely no justification for Labor to wait until after the election to legislate this pledge. What they're doing is cruel. It is cruel to dangle student debt relief as an enticement to win votes. People can see right through it. People are sick and tired of being used as pawns in this political game. In the absence of the government bringing in legislation to do this, we are moving this amendment right now to the Universities Accord Bill because Labor doesn't want to give assurance to students and graduates, whose debts have shackled them. It takes a lifetime to pay off this debt. This is a chance for Labor to show that they actually care about people struggling under the weight of student debt.

I hope that Labor can support their own policy today, and I commend the amendment to the Senate.

Sarah Henderson (Victoria, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Education) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The coalition will be opposing this amendment. This proposal, announced by the government, shows the Albanese government has given up on the fight against inflation. It reeks of elitism and unfairness. Having failed to address the cost of living at its source, Labor has now decided to start running the ruler over who will vote for them and who won't without addressing the higher inflation. What this risks is higher interest rates for longer and higher inflation.

This proposal by Labor is not how to manage the economy. The best way to bring down inflation is to tackle the problem at its source. This requires getting the economy back on track and back to basics, reining in wasteful government spending and boosting productivity to relieve price pressures. Instead, what Labor is proposing to do is to spend more, raise taxes and add cost to the supply side of the economy that is only going to make inflation worse. This has been broadly discredited by leading independent economists. The Prime Minister has had 2½ years to get inflation under control. He's now robbing future generations to try and cover up what Australians are already realising: Labor is not up to the job of fixing the economy.

What's also clear here is that this policy excludes 24 million Australians who do not have a HELP debt and who are struggling with Labor's cost-of-living crisis. It just passes this debt onto all Australians—$16 billion, or $1,600 per household—and, of course, as I mentioned before, it reeks of unfairness and elitism. More than 55,000 people have a HELP debt of between $100,000 and $200,000, meaning that, under this policy, Labor would deliver them an average pay cheque of around $25,000. So some people get $25,000 and some people get a piddling amount, but most Australians get nothing at all. How is this fair when so many young Australians can barely pay the rent or put food on the table? That is why the coalition will not support this amendment.

Anthony Chisholm (Queensland, Australian Labor Party, Assistant Minister for Education) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The government will also not be supporting this amendment. This is a government that has done more for student debt than the Greens have ever done and ever will. We will continue to reform the HECS system to take the pressure off Australians with a student debt, and we will do it in a staged and methodical way.

First, we are fixing indexation, which is what this bill does. The bill caps the indexation rate at the lower of either the consumer price index or the wage price index, with effect from 1 June 2023. This wipes out what happened last year and ensures it can't happen again. This will cut around $3 billion in student debt for more than three million Australians. We will then deliver further relief to all Australians with student debt by 1 July next year—

Karen Grogan (SA, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Minister, can you resume your seat for a moment? Senator Shoebridge, you're being very disorderly.

Anthony Chisholm (Queensland, Australian Labor Party, Assistant Minister for Education) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

We will then deliver further relief to all Australians with a student debt by 1 June next year, before the next round of indexation is applied. This will cut a further 20 per cent off all student debts. We will also raise the minimum repayment threshold to make the HECS repayment system fairer.

The third step is to establish an Australian tertiary education commission to provide advice to government on the setting of course fees. The government expects ATEC to be operating from the middle of next year. It's appropriate that any legislative changes go through the proper process of scrutiny and consultation, as the bill before us has. I can assure the Senate and the Australian community that the Australian Labor government and only the Albanese Labor government will cut a further 20 per cent off all student debts that exist at 1 June next year.

So what this actually is by the Greens is a political stunt. We're pretty used to them in this chamber, we'd have to say, from what they do from motion to motion, from policy to policy and from legislation to legislation. The Greens are proposing that we make significant structural changes to the HECS system without the Senate applying any scrutiny to it. No inquiries, no community consultation—absolutely nothing. They announced that they would be moving these amendments over a week ago, in a media release. Then there was silence until moments before the committee stage began this afternoon, when we finally saw the amendments, all two pages of them.

Having done that, the Greens voted against a motion to have these amendments properly considered by a committee. That speaks volumes for where they're at. The committee would consider, for example, if the mechanisms they propose are appropriate, if they have any unintended consequences, if they leave any students behind or if they don't grasp all of the complexities of the HELP system.

Instead, they expect this chamber to make significant structural changes to the HECS system on a handful of hours' notice of the provisions on a two-page amendment. It's an irresponsible approach and it's disrespectful of the process being undertaken here, and the government will, therefore, not support it. It is, however, emblematic of how the Greens approach so many areas of national importance, whether that be housing or education—they pursue stunts instead of good policy, media releases instead of considered amendments. The amendments will be opposed.

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

That says it all. For Labor, it's a stunt to try to do something about student debt and try to do it now. It's disrespectful to try to help so many millions of people being crushed under the load of student debt which shouldn't exist anyway. That's the reason student debt can't be fixed; student debt shouldn't exist. Here we are, putting your own policy in front of you to say, 'Sure, we legislate it now,' but you won't even do that. You stand here and go on about the hypocrisy of the Greens trying to be political—sorry, this has been our policy. You only moved to do even this meagre 20 per cent because you were forced to do so and because the community is really suffering in the cost-of-living crisis, with ever increasing student debt. It's pretty shameful that Labor can't even vote for their own policy and are coming up with these ridiculous excuses when they're bringing in bill after bill which are really complex and will have terrible consequences. They are ramming them through this week, but they stand here and say abolishing, or legislating to abolish, 20 per cent of student debt is somehow this complex bill which will have unintended consequences. The only consequence it will have is that people will get certainty that some of their student debt at least will be wiped by next year.

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

The hypocrisy of Labor to say that the reason they won't support these Greens' amendments to implement Labor policy to cut 20 per cent of debt is it needs to go to an inquiry because it's complex. This is the same Labor government that's ramming through three aggressive attacks on migration law with a 24-hour inquiry into migration law. They're willing to smash the rights of people seeking asylum without an inquiry, but they're not willing to cut student debt without an inquiry. This is the same Labor government that's ramming through a deal with Peter Dutton, shaking hands with the opposition leader to put through the most self-interested donations law reforms without an inquiry. They're willing to give themselves millions of dollars of additional funding without an inquiry but they won't cut student debt without an inquiry.

Do you know what? Labor do have a record on student debt. Labor created student debt. Labor created HECS debt. It was brought to you by a Labor government, by a bunch of entitled Labor politicians who had a free university education. Labor invented the entire concept of student debt for Australia. They put it in a ribbon—it's brought to you by Labor. Yes, Labor has a very clear tradition on this. If anyone's wondering about where their debt came from, just remember this: Labor invented student debt. Labor created HECS debt. A bunch of Labor politicians who got free education came up with the idea of putting this generation of students into debt, and now they won't even join with the Greens to give it a haircut of 20 per cent, which is their policy. Shame on Labor!

Anthony Chisholm (Queensland, Australian Labor Party, Assistant Minister for Education) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

What Senator Shoebridge doesn't understand is the history of HECS. Back in those days when the Hawke government invented HECS, most of those people hadn't actually been to university. What HECS was able to do is expand the number of people from working-class families who could go and study at university. That's what it did. You oppose that with hypocrisy, by actually pursuing this issue when it's Labor who have done more for people to attend university than any government.

We're proud of our record when it comes to HECS and the opportunity that it has provided. We are also passionate about ensuring that when we lower it, it goes through a proper process to ensure that it has the impact that we want it to.

So we will absolutely defend HECS and the role it has played in expanding the number of people who go to university. Our aim is to see more and more people be able to go to university. That's what the Accord process was all about. That's what we're trying to implement here today, to ensure that that opportunity is open to more Australians, particularly those from rural, regional and remote locations and those from lower socioeconomic backgrounds. This is the first part of that legislation. It's really important that we do it but that we do it in a considered way, and this bill has gone through that process.

Sarah Henderson (Victoria, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Education) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

In relation to Labor's policy, its 20 per cent discount—of course, it's now voting against its own policy, as everyone can see—I think it's really important to put on the record here what the experts are saying. Chris Richardson, the leading Australian economist, said:

… handing $16bn to graduates is a reverse Robin Hood: it's a tax cut targeted to the big end of town—

and we know Labor is good at looking after the big end of town—

with money going from the less well off to the better off.

It's a fairness fail.

Worse still, that $16bn does nothing for the nation's future.

Andrew Lilley, the chief interest rate strategist with Barrenjoey, said:

Just sad to see this. Many good ways to "spend" ten billion. Attempting to buy 3 million votes in a close election is not a good one. We should be wary—creeping populism can grow for decades.

And this is from Ashley Craig, economist:

"This is an abominable idea that gives precious tax dollars to rich Australians while doing nothing to help with the currently elevated cost of living.

"If it is popular, it is because people don't understand this, and are being misled."

"This is exceptionally bad policy which favours the rich, doesn't help with current cost of living, and does nothing to encourage higher ed."

This is very bad policy. As I said before, this wreaks of unfairness. This wreaks of elitism. This wreaks of Labor looking after the top end of town. I say to Labor: it's time this government starts looking at ordinary, hard-working Australians and starts treating all Australians with the fairness they deserve.

Anthony Chisholm (Queensland, Australian Labor Party, Assistant Minister for Education) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Henderson, I don't believe any Australians are ordinary; I think they're all exceptional. They all work hard, and we want to see all those people    have the opportunity to get ahead, which is why we want to ensure that they can have access to a higher education degree, if that's what they want to pursue, but that it is also one that doesn't burden them into the future. So what I would point out are the comments from Bruce Chapman, who is the architect of HECS, and he had the following to say:

It is generally and correctly believed that the overall level of HECS-HELP debt has become excessive and that, in this context, a one-off 20 per cent cut in the level of debt is welcome …

That's from the architect of HECS, Bruce Chapman, with his comments on our recent announcement.

Penny Allman-Payne (Queensland, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I have a question for the minister. If Mr Chapman says that cutting 20 per cent is welcome, why won't Labor do it now?

Anthony Chisholm (Queensland, Australian Labor Party, Assistant Minister for Education) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Thanks, Senator Allman-Payne. As I talked through before in my response to Senator Faruqi, we want to do that policy in a considered way where we're able to treat the Senate with the respect it deserves and also those stakeholders with the respect they deserve by going through a proper committee process. We had an amendment to that regard as a second reading amendment. Unfortunately, that was voted down. But we think that that substantial change does need to be properly scrutinised to ensure that it is done in the appropriate way and people have the opportunity to contribute to that debate.

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

Minister, the international student caps bill went through a very rigorous inquiry process where literally every single person who gave evidence said that the bill should be canned, yet you are pushing ahead with this bill. Are there double standards here, where you make a decision on whatever is more opportunistic for the Labor government?

Anthony Chisholm (Queensland, Australian Labor Party, Assistant Minister for Education) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Thanks, Senator Faruqi. No, I don't believe so. I think what that goes to is the thorough process that we went through with regard to the international student numbers. That bill was worked on for months by the committee. A substantial report and amount of work was put into it. It's really disappointing that those who participated in it still chose to oppose that bill, which we think was an important one for universities in this country.

Sarah Henderson (Victoria, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Education) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Very briefly, I want to correct the record in relation to the student debt that Australians have faced under this government. One of the drivers for this bill is that student debt is out of control under Labor, and this is a direct consequence of Labor's high inflation and economic mismanagement. Labor has had to desperately scramble to change HELP indexation and the way it is calculated because we have seen student debt rise by nearly 16 per cent under this government—by 3.9 per cent on 1 June 2022, by 7.1 per cent on 1 June 2023 and by 4.7 per cent on 1 June 2024. For someone with an average loan of around $24,700 as at June 2022, this has meant a crippling increase of around $4,000. Contrast that with the average annual indexation of 1.7 per cent under the former coalition government. Even if this bill comes through, effecting the change in HECS indexation, Australians are not going to forget. This still means an increase in student debt of 11.1 per cent.

As for the rubbish that we're hearing about $3 billion being wiped, the bottom line is that, out of three million debtors, it's estimated that only about 200,000 of those Australians will receive a refund. For most Australians, this adjustment will appear in their HELP loan account and, of course, whatever adjustment does occur in their HELP loan account will be eaten away by future indexation.

This government has failed students who have a student loan. We've seen this government's inflation—high inflation, homegrown inflation—drive student debt sky-high, and now this government is scrambling to rewrite history. But I can assure the minister, and I can assure the Prime Minister and the Minister for Education: Australians will not forget what you have done to them, including the three million Australians with a student loan.

Anthony Chisholm (Queensland, Australian Labor Party, Assistant Minister for Education) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Thanks, Senator Henderson, for that contribution. But, honestly, I can't believe that you would raise the cost of degrees for people, given the record of the previous government. The damage that you did with the cost of degrees was completely outrageous. That is still being felt across the university sector.

Also, when it come to the economy, what did we inherit when we came to government? Inflation was much higher and rising. It is now lower and falling. That's the record of our government: inflation is lower and falling, when it was higher and rising under our predecessors. It had a six in front of it under the previous government; it now has a two in front of it. We've delivered two budget surpluses, because we know that it is important to ensure we do that to bring down inflation. We've created a million new jobs. It's an economic record that this government is proud of.

In terms of capping the HELP indexation rate to the lower of either the CPI or the wage price index, that's a recommendation of the Universities Accord. It will prevent growth in student debt from outpacing wages into the future. This change will provide relief for students while continuing to protect the integrity and value of the HELP system, which has massively expanded higher education access for millions of Australians. That is what we are trying to achieve with this bill, and that is why it is important for the Australian people.

Karen Grogan (SA, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

There being no more contributions, the question is that amendments (1) and (2) on sheet 3140 be agreed to. A division is required. We will defer the division to a later date, given that is it after 6.30 pm.

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

by leave—I move Greens amendments (1) and (2) on sheet 2952 together:

That the House of Representatives be requested to make the following amendments:

(1) Clause 2, page 2 (table item 9), omit the table item, substitute:

(2) Schedule 4, page 34 (lines 1 to 25), omit the Schedule, substitute::

Schedule 4 — Pay students for mandatory placements

Part 1 — Main amendments

Higher Education Support Act 2003

1 After Part 2-2A

Insert:

Part 2-2B — Grants for Commonwealth stipends for students undertaking mandatory placements

Division 39 — Grants for Commonwealth stipends for students undertaking mandatory placements

39-1 What this Part is about

Grants are payable under this Part to Table A providers and Table B providers to pay, as a benefit to students, Commonwealth stipends to students who undertake a mandatory placement for a course of study with the provider.

Note: This Part does not apply to Table C providers: see section 5-1.

39-2 The Commonwealth Stipends Guidelines

Grants under this Part are also dealt with in the Commonwealth Stipends Guidelines. The provisions of this Part indicate when a particular matter is or may be dealt with in these Guidelines.

Note: The Commonwealth Stipends Guidelines are made by the Minister under section 238-10.

39-3 Eligibility of higher education providers to receive grants for Commonwealth stipends

(1) *Table A providers and *Table B providers are eligible to receive, for the year 2025 or a later year, a grant to pay, as a benefit to students, *Commonwealth stipends to students who *undertake a mandatory placement for a *course of study with the provider.

(2) A student undertakes a mandatory placement for a *course of study with a higher education provider if:

(a) the student undertakes a placement with an employer for which the student is not entitled to be paid remuneration; and

(b) the placement is a requirement of the course of study with the provider; and

(c) the student is *enrolled in the course of study with the provider; and

(d) the placement is authorised under a law or an administrative arrangement of the Commonwealth, a State or a Territory; and

(e) any other requirements prescribed by the Commonwealth Stipends Guidelines for the purposes of this paragraph are met.

(3) A provider that is eligible to receive a grant under subsection (1) is an eligible stipend provider.

39-4 Conditions of grants

(1) This section sets out the conditions of a grant under this Part for an *eligible stipend provider.

First condition provider must pay Commonwealth stipends

(2) The first condition is that the provider must pay, to each student who *undertakes a mandatory placement for a *course of study with the provider, a *Commonwealth stipend worked out in accordance with section 39-5 for the hours the student undertakes in the placement.

Second condition quality and accountability requirements

(3) The second condition is that the provider must meet the *quality and accountability requirements.

Third condition other prescribed requirements

(4) The third condition is that the provider must meet any other requirements prescribed by the Commonwealth Stipends Guidelines for the purposes of this subsection.

39-5 Commonwealth stipends rate

(1) A *Commonwealth stipend for the hours in a day that a student *undertakes a mandatory placement for a *course of study with an *eligible stipend provider is worked out using the hourly rate mentioned in subsection (2) for the day.

(2) The hourly rate for a day is the national minimum wage (when expressed as a monetary amount per hour) set by a *national minimum wage order that is in operation on the day (whether the order has also taken effect on that day).

Note: For when a national minimum wage order comes into operation, see section 287 of the Fair Work Act 2009.

(3) For the purposes of subsection (2):

(a) the national minimum wage is taken to be the wage set by the national minimum wage order for employees in relation to whom no exceptional circumstances exist (see subsection 287(2) of the Fair Work Act 2009); and

(b) if:

(i) the Fair Work Commission makes a determination under section 296 of the Fair Work Act 2009 varying a national minimum wage order; and

(ii) the day the determination comes into operation under section 297 of that Act is earlier than the day the determination is made;

the determination is taken to come into operation on the day the determination is made.

39-6 Amounts payable under this Part

Amounts payable

(1) If a higher education provider is eligible to receive a grant under this Part for a year, there is payable by the Commonwealth to the provider for the year, an amount equal to the greater of the following amounts:

(a) the amount worked out for the provider and the year using the method prescribed by the Commonwealth Stipends Guidelines for the purposes of this paragraph;

(b) the amount determined by the Minister under subsection (2) for the provider and the year.

Minister must determine sufficient grant amount

(2) The Minister must, by legislative instrument, determine an amount for an *eligible stipend provider and a year for the purposes of paragraph (1)(b).

Note: A single instrument may determine amounts for multiple eligible stipend providers and years.

(3) A determination of an amount under subsection (2) for a provider and a year:

(a) must be made before the start of the year; and

(b) may be varied at any time before the end of the year, but no later.

(4) Before the Minister makes an instrument under subsection (2):

(a) to determine an amount for an eligible stipend provider and a year; or

(b) to vary an amount for an eligible stipend provider and a year;

the Minister must be satisfied that the amount, as determined or varied, is sufficient for the provider to pay *Commonwealth stipends to students *undertaking a mandatory placement for a *course of study with the provider in that year.

39-7 Other matters relating to grants for Commonwealth stipends

The Commonwealth Stipends Guidelines may provide for, or in relation to, the following matters in respect of grants under this Part to *eligible stipend providers to pay *Commonwealth stipends to students *undertaking a mandatory placement for a *course of study with the provider:

(a) how grants to providers are to be made;

(b) how providers are to pay Commonwealth stipends to students of the provider;

(c) the conditions that apply to Commonwealth stipends;

(d) information that providers are to give to:

(i) the Minister; or

(ii) the *Chief Executive Centrelink or a Departmental employee (within the meaning of the Human Services (Centrelink) Act 1997); or

(iii) the Secretary, or an employee, of the Department administered by the Minister who administers the Veterans' Entitlements Act 1986.

39-8 Rollover of grant amounts

(1) If:

(a) a higher education provider to which a grant under this Part has been made in respect of a year fails to spend an amount of that grant; and

(b) the *Secretary determines under subsection (3) that this section is to apply to the provider in respect of that grant;

then so much of the unspent amount as the Secretary determines under that subsection is taken to be granted to the provider under this Part in respect of the next following year.

(2) The grant is taken to be made:

(a) under the same conditions as the conditions of the original grant except the grant is taken to be made in respect of the next following year; or

(b) under such other conditions as the Secretary determines under subsection (4).

(3) For the purposes of subsection (1), the Secretary may, by notifiable instrument, determine:

(a) that this section is to apply to a particular higher education provider in respect of one or more grants; and

(b) for each grant, an amount of the unspent amount of the grant.

(4) For the purposes of paragraph (2)(b), the Secretary may, by notifiable instrument, determine conditions that apply to one or more grants made to a particular higher education provider.

39-9 Constitutional basis of this Part

This Part relies on the Commonwealth's legislative powers under paragraph 51(xxiiiA) (benefits to students) of the Constitution.

39-10 Additional operation of this Part

(1) In addition to section 39-9, this Part also has effect as provided by this section.

Territories

(2) This Part also has the effect it would have if a reference to a grant under this Part were expressly confined to a grant in or in relation to a Territory.

Indigenous persons

(3) This Part also has the effect it would have if a reference to a student *undertaking a mandatory placement for a *course of study with a higher education provider were expressly confined to a student who is an *Indigenous person.

Part 2 — Other amendments

Higher Education Support Act 2003

2 After paragraph 3-5(1)(aa)

Insert:

(ab) grants for Commonwealth stipends;

3 After paragraph 5-1(4)(aa)

Insert:

(ab) Part 2-2B (Commonwealth stipends);

4 Section 8-1

Omit "4 kinds" (wherever occurring), substitute "5 kinds".

5 Section 8-1

After:

insert:

6 Subparagraph 22-15(1)(a)(i)

After "2-2A,", insert "2-2B,".

7 Sections 51-1, 54-1 and 164-15

After "2-2A," (wherever occurring), insert "2-2B,".

8 Paragraphs 180-25(5)(e) and (6)(e)

After "2-2A", insert ", 2-2B".

9 Subsection 238-5(1)

After "section 38-45,", insert "39-6,".

10 Subsection 238-10(1) (after table item 3)

Insert:

11 Subclause 1(1) of Schedule 1

Insert:

Commonwealth stipends means stipends payable:

(a) by an *eligible stipend provider to a student *undertaking a mandatory placement for a *course of study with the provider; and

(b) in accordance with the conditions of a grant made by the Commonwealth to the provider under Part 2-2B.

eligible stipend provider has the meaning given by subsection 39-3(3).

national minimum wage order has the same meaning as in the Fair Work Act 2009.

undertake a mandatory placement: see subsection 39-3(2) for when a student undertakes a mandatory placement for a *course of study with a higher education provider.

Social Security Act 1991

12 Subparagraph 8(8)(zja)(ia)

Omit "this section.", substitute "this section; or".

13 After subparagraph 8(8)(zja)(ia)

Insert:

(ib) Commonwealth stipends provided for under Part 2-2B of the Higher Education Support Act 2003 (grants for Commonwealth stipends for students undertaking mandatory placements); or

Social Security (Administration) Act 1999

14 After subparagraph 195(2)(i)(xviii)

Insert:

(xviiia) the amount of Commonwealth stipends received by the person in accordance with Part 2-2B of the Higher Education Support Act 2003 (grants for Commonwealth stipends for students undertaking mandatory placements); and

15 After paragraph 202(1)(da)

Insert:

(db) administering Commonwealth stipends provided for under Part 2-2B of the Higher Education Support Act 2003 (grants for Commonwealth stipends for students undertaking mandatory placements); or

16 After paragraph 202(2)(daaa)

Insert:

(daab) for the purposes of the administration of Commonwealth stipends provided for under Part 2-2B of the Higher Education Support Act 2003 (grants for Commonwealth stipends for students undertaking mandatory placements); or

Veterans' Entitlements Act 1986

17 After paragraph 5H(8)(hac)

Insert:

(had) the amount of Commonwealth stipends provided for under Part 2-2B of the Higher Education Support Act 2003 (grants for Commonwealth stipends for students undertaking mandatory placements);

18 Transitional provision

Paragraph 39-6(3)(a) of the Higher Education Support Act 2003, as inserted by this Part, does not apply to a determination for the year 2025.

_____

Statement pursuant to the order of the Senate of 26 June 2000

Amendment (2)

Amendment (2) is framed as a request because it amends the bill to require the Commonwealth to provide grants to eligible higher education providers, a condition of which is that those providers must pay Commonwealth stipends to students who undertake a mandatory placement for a course of study with a higher education provider.

As the amendment requires the Commonwealth to provide grants to eligible higher education providers, the effect of the amendment would increase the amount of expenditure under the standing appropriation in section 238-12 of the Higher Education Support Act 2003.

Amendment (1)

Amendment (1) is consequential to amendment (2).

_____

Statement by the Clerk of the Senate pursuant to the order of the Senate of 26 June 2000

Amendment (2)

If the effect of the amendment is to increase expenditure under the standing appropriation in section 238-12 of the Higher Education Support Act 2003 then it is in accordance with the precedents of the Senate that the amendment be moved as a request.

Amendment (1)

This amendment is consequential on the request. It is the practice of the Senate that an amendment that is consequential on an amendment framed as a request may also be framed as a request.

As far as mandatory placements go, this bill is a move in the right direction. But, I have to say, it reflects a real lack of understanding of the severity of placement poverty and its impacts on students at the moment. We support what's in the bill—that is, nursing, teaching and social work students being paid for mandatory placements. But the other thousands of students who do hundreds of hours of mandatory placements to complete their degrees should also be paid. What about students doing allied health or veterinary science or psychology or medicine, and so many others? Every student should be paid for every hour of their labour.

This bill only just touches the sides of the issue of placement poverty. I'm sure every single senator in this place has heard from students, especially in this cost-of-living crisis but even without the cost-of-living crisis, about how they have struggled when they have to do hundreds of hours of unpaid placement work when they are already finding it so difficult to make ends meet, to put food on the table, to go to the dentist, to go to the doctor or to pay their rent. On top of that, when they have to do placements some of them have had to take loans out or give up their paid jobs. If they don't give up their paid jobs, they're pretty much working 24/7.

The Greens' amendments ensure that all students are paid for the work that they do, no matter what degree they are doing, and require that payments be made at a national minimum wage. At the moment, the way it works out is $8 an hour, which is literally peanuts. These amendments would also commence earlier, on 1 January 2025. Students can't wait another eight months, until July next year, to start being paid for the work they do.

One of the other things our amendments do is enshrine the Commonwealth practical placements into legislation. That's what is needed. They ensure that all students who undertake mandatory practical placements as part of their studies are paid for that. I hope we can push for a move further on providing that every single student who does mandatory placements be paid for them at a minimum wage. I have heard from so many students, and recently from medical students, who are really struggling. They are the ones who do the maximum amount of hours for their placements, and they have been telling me that marginalised students especially, from marginalised communities, suffer the most. Many students have to travel as well to do their placements.

This is a way of ensuring that the system is fair and that every student is paid for every hour at a minimum wage, and that it is a universal payment. At the moment students are going to be chosen, as to who will get paid for mandatory placements. I commend these amendments to the Senate.

Anthony Chisholm (Queensland, Australian Labor Party, Assistant Minister for Education) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The government will not support these amendments. They go beyond the scope of the placements and they are beyond education and training. The intention of these payments is to provide cost-of-living support to students undertaking workplace based training rather than being paid for work. Students in receipt of a payment must be undertaking placements that are lawfully unpaid because of the definition of 'vocational placement' under the Fair Work Act 2009.

This requires that the person is not entitled to receive any remuneration for their work.

The proposed amendments also seek to enshrine guidelines in legislation. It is standard practice for programs of this nature to have their details outlined in guidelines. It helps with implementation. There have been a number of recent examples of this.

Regarding implementation from 1 January 2025, this is a new program. Providers need time to put in place arrangements to ensure payments are able to be made to students. These include new systems, communications, marketing and reporting arrangements. The government has been consulting with the sector to ensure the program can be implemented and administered simply while remaining targeted to those students who need it most.

Eligibility for Commonwealth prac payments will be targeted to students on low-income support and students who typically need to work to support themselves while studying. These students typically face the greatest financial pressure during placements. Eligibility criteria will be finalised in consultation with stakeholders following the passage of the legislation and well before the commencement date of 1 July 2025.

The guidelines are disallowable instruments. They can be considered by members of parliament once tabled, and that is standard practice.

Matt O'Sullivan (WA, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The question is that amendments (1) and (2) on sheet 2952 be agreed to. A division is required. Given it's after 6.30, we'll hold that division at a later time.

Sarah Henderson (Victoria, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Education) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I seek leave to move the opposition's amendment on sheet 3045.

The TEMPORARY CHAIR: Senator Henderson, we cannot proceed any further because of contingencies on other motions. We'll have to deal with that at a later time. You can make a contribution, though; you just can't move any other amendments. Alternatively, the committee can report progress and we'll deal with it at another time. I'm in the hands of the Senate.

Progress reported.