Higher Education

The Hon. T.T. NGO (15:43): Today I would again like to draw members' attention to the Abbott government's attack on higher education funding. Since I last spoke in the parliament on this matter the Senate has, thankfully, blocked the federal government's original funding proposals, which included a 20 per cent cut in public funding, indexing of university fees to the government bond rate, and the complete deregulation of university fees.

It would seem that minister Pyne is trying to buy his way to his ultimate goal of fee deregulation by scrapping his proposed 20 per cent cut to public funding in return for allowing universities to set their own course fees. As result, any remaining opposition to the reforms within Australia's Group of Eight universities appears to have largely dissipated, with the group's CEO Vicki Thomson coming out in support of minister Pyne's proposal to scrap the 20 per cent funding cut. This support is due to minister Pyne allowing them to keep all their existing funding and giving them the green light to charge what they want.

This tactic of dividing students and universities is just another example of this government's divisiveness. The Abbott government calls themselves Liberals, yet what they are proposing is to deregulate fees but not deregulate the market. I do not necessarily agree with this myself, but I find it rather hypocritical of the minister to suggest that fee deregulation will mean cheaper fees in the long run.

It is not a bad deal for the vice chancellors—charge what you want and continue with the same government protections from foreign universities entering the Australian market. Adelaide has three universities. Many degrees are only offered at one campus. My question to minister Pyne is: where is the competition that will supposedly drive down fees? These proposed changes will only ensure students will still be the ones carrying the financial burden. Especially those undertaking degrees such as medicine could end up with a HECS debt well in excess of $100,000. I have heard recently it could reach $200,000.

Instead of deregulating fees, the Abbott government should focus its efforts on proper reform of the tertiary sector, in particular tackling the growing issue of universities producing ever higher numbers of graduates for sectors where there simply is no demand, which contributes to lower levels of graduates in full-time employment. Data from the federal government's own budget papers supports this, suggesting that approximately 30 per cent of graduates will be jobless four months after completing their studies. All the Abbott government's plan does is increase inequality without improving educational and employment outcomes for students.