Tony Zappia (Makin, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I continue my remarks in respect of the Higher Education Support Amendment (2009 Budget Measures) Bill 2009. I note and welcome that this bill offers increased support for nursing and teaching. These are two professions of which there is a shortage in the community. In the teaching profession, in 1990 the student to teacher ratio was 13 students for every one teacher. In 2006 this ratio has increased to 20 students for every one teacher. Many of the teachers in the workforce are nearing retirement age. As the population ages and the baby-boomer generation begin to retire, we can expect to face serious shortages in both the teaching and nursing professions.

The training of nurses has been given an additional boost by the Rudd government’s investment of $275 million in some 31 GP superclinics around Australia. Recently the Prime Minister and the federal Minister for Health and Ageing were in Adelaide to announce details of three GP superclinics there. These clinics deliver on key promises made during the 2007 election campaign.

The Modbury GP superclinic in my electorate of Makin is a combined $25 million project between state and federal governments. As well as providing a range of GP and allied health services, a critical component of the Modbury GP superclinic will be training. The government is currently in discussions with the University of Adelaide and the University of South Australia to provide much needed opportunities for the education and training of health professionals, including GPs, nurses and allied health practitioners, at the Modbury GP superclinic site. This is a further example of what the Rudd government is doing to support the training of nurses and address the shortage of nurses within the community.

The bill also extends HECS-HELP benefits to teaching and nursing graduates. These benefits, which previously applied to maths and science graduates, will mean reduced HELP repayments—that is, Higher Education Loan Plan repayments—for eligible teaching and nursing graduates who go on to work in the field. This measure should encourage graduates from these courses to work in the professions and thereby help address critical shortages of trained workers in these professions.

I also commend the measures in the bill that focus on research, and the rewards and incentives the bill offers Australia’s universities for increasing their research capacity. Universities do more than educate students. They are also centres of research and frequently partner with government, industry and the community to develop critical new ideas and concepts. It is through university based research that we will develop many of the solutions to the issues facing our community in the 21st century such as climate change, water and an ageing population. It is often through research that Australian universities, regardless of their geographical location, are able to compete on the world stage.

Our universities provide some of the best research and development facilities in Australia. In my own region the University of South Australia works closely with many of the high technology and defence industries in the region. In 2002, when the FedSat satellite was launched from Japan, the Mawson Lakes campus of the University of South Australia was associated with the development of a critical component of the satellite. I was privileged at that time to be invited to the university to see a direct telecast of the launching of the satellite. Again, that was only as a result of the local university having been involved.

Only yesterday evening I met Amber Stubek, a young lady from the University of Ballarat’s Internet Commerce Security Laboratory, who is working with the Australian Federal Police, Westpac, IBM and the Australian Defence Force on a cybercrime prevention program as part of a PhD thesis that she has undertaken. This is another example of research being carried out by one of our universities on a matter that is going to become increasingly important in the prevention of cyber based crime. Cybercrime is occurring on an increasing basis not only here in Australia but throughout the world and is difficult to detect and prevent. I believe the work that Amber is carrying out will be very important to our future efforts to prevent cybercrime.

I also welcome the performance funding measures associated with this bill. As recipients of public funding, universities should also be publicly accountable for those funds. Performance funding, properly measured—and I stress ‘properly measured’ because we do not want league tables to be used in a manner which distorts the true performance of universities—is in the public interest. The public have a right to know how public funds are being used and how effectively they are being used.

In summary, this bill contains a number of measures in response to the Bradley review of higher education. It reverses the decline in real public expenditure on higher education in Australia that we have seen in recent years. I welcome these measures and commend the bill to the House.

Sid Sidebottom (Braddon, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I am very pleased to support the Higher Education Support Amendment (2009 Budget Measures) Bill 2009, because it is part and parcel of a systematic commitment by this government to improve the quality of education and training in this country and the quality of teaching and learning in particular. The government’s systematic approach to what has been termed an education revolution begins at the earliest stages of learning, with the reforms that we are continuing to introduce in early childhood education. It includes greater funding, improvement and the introduction of programs involved with literacy and numeracy; support and funding for improving the teaching of languages in our schools; and the improvement of facilities in our schools throughout Australia where the teaching and learning will take place. It is very much needed, and I am particularly grateful that so much of the infrastructure resources are to go into primary education.

Further funding and work will go into introducing national curricula—particularly in the areas of mathematics, science, English and history, which are so important—and programs related to training places throughout Australia, including TAFE institutions, VET courses, senior secondary colleges and also now, in this legislation in particular, a commitment to higher education. I congratulate the minister and all those who have assisted her on the excellent work that has been done in this area, and I also congratulate this government for continuing this momentum.

The reform agenda which is inherent in this legislation is based on Labor’s intentions, set out in our 2006 white paper when we were in opposition, and the initiatives that we wanted to introduce into higher education. Now that we are in government, these intentions have been underpinned by the review of Australian higher education, chaired by Denise Bradley, who made 46 major recommendations in relation to higher education. The bill before us deals in part with a number of those important recommendations. This legislation is a response to both these processes and follows the minister’s substantial response set out in the 2009-10 budget. I would like to reiterate that the budget committed $5.7 billion to higher education, innovation and research over four years and that less than half of the additional funding of $2.2 billion will provide additional recurrent funding for university teaching, learning and, importantly, research.

The guiding principles behind this legislation were set out by the minister in her second reading speech. I would like to briefly reiterate those for the record. The minister said:

… the Government is launching a reform agenda for higher education that will transform the scale, potential and quality of the nation’s universities and open the doors of higher education to a new generation of Australians.

It is an integrated policy approach. An approach that provides for structural change and improves the financial sustainability of our universities. An approach that guarantees quality in a system that delivers funding for growth and participation by students from all walks of life and recognises the vital importance of research by our best and brightest.

These are very, very important guiding principles behind much needed reforms in higher education. In short, what the minister outlined in her second reading speech was, firstly, basing access to our institutions of higher education on merit, not on the ability to pay; secondly, broadening access to higher education, especially to groups that are traditionally underrepresented; thirdly, the importance of quality in the university system of education to the community and the individual.

In our tendency towards an adversarial system, in both law and government, we tend to fluctuate between black and white. Most Australians, I think, live in the grey area. In the past I have found, as a former educator, an unfortunate tendency in political speak—and I believe there is some truth to this—to underplay the importance of trade training and vocational education. University tended to be promoted as the be-all and end-all in terms of recognising education. I think that tendency was probably more correct than not. But what we saw in the last 10 to 13 years, I think as a matter of political convenience, was a growing view that because we got rid of our technical schools trades and vocational education were at the bottom of the heap in terms of recognition in education and what we value in our society. We began to rebuild this view of the importance of trades and vocational education, quite correctly. But what we started to do in the political speak—and I used to hear it in this place—was to denigrate higher education again. In fact, what we should be doing is promoting the full range of education and learning opportunities. That includes vocational education, training and skills and also university, along with the more traditional skills and values related to the university. What we tended to get was a ‘them against us’ approach, which was highly unfortunate, and it tended to be reflected, I believe, in the underfunding of higher education that has taken place particularly over the last 10 years in the name of an economic and political philosophy that said ‘the user should pay.’

These amendments seek to restore the balance. That is what I believe mainstream Australia expects and accepts. The bill technically amends the Higher Education Support Act 2003 to implement the Australian government’s reform to the higher education system, as I mentioned and as was announced in the 2009-2010 budget. Two key targets are recommended by the Bradley review, and these are adopted by the government and contained in this legislation, following on the principles of broadening access to higher education, as I mentioned earlier, and practically recognising the importance of quality university education. I do not think anyone or any nation would disagree with the importance of developing a robust, innovative, exploratory university sector, particularly in terms of teaching, learning and research.

The government has adopted two key targets recommended by the review, as I mentioned. The first is a national target of at least 40 per cent of 25- to 34-year-olds attaining a qualification at bachelor level or above by 2025. I recognise that the Bradley review recommended that this should happen by 2020. However, this legislation seeks to achieve these important milestones by 2025. The second key target is that, by 2020, 20 per cent of university enrolments at undergraduate level be for people from low-socioeconomic status—what we call SES—backgrounds. How will we go about achieving these targets? The first point is to free up the sector to fund students rather than places and to encourage quality teaching and learning. It is great to hear that speakers on all sides of the House absolutely endorse these very important principles. This will involve increased funding for promoting and sustaining real future growth in student numbers and ensuring improved quality.

This bill also sets out funding and intentions to try to introduce a system to set out the quality standards and performance indicators that will be required and used to measure this quality performance. It will also reform an indexation formula that did little more than effectively cut public investment in this sector over time. I do not think anybody can deny the fact that the sector has been gradually undercut in terms of funding; indeed, that was part of the philosophical underpinning of the former government’s attitude toward higher education, which involved forcing more people to pay and opening up more positions to people who would pay a fee.

Let us look at the funding reforms outlined in these amendments. With the bill, a decade of underfunding will come to an end. The national scandal of declining public investment in higher education as a proportion of gross domestic product will come to an end. It has been available for everyone to see, in terms of underfunding compared to other OECD countries. The era of political interference and micromanagement by ministers and officials will come to an end. A new approach to higher education funding, one that acknowledges the primary importance of students and their learning, is needed. One would hope that is the fundamental principle behind all education, no matter what level or what sector. The bill introduces the first stage of a new, student centred funding system for higher education which will have an estimated cost of $491 million over four years. For 2010 and 2011—the transitional years—the cap on overenrolment for Commonwealth supported places will be lifted from five per cent to 10 per cent in funding terms. The limit on funding under the Commonwealth Grant Scheme for 2012 will be removed. It will be removed to reflect the fact that there will be no overall limit on the number of students that table A higher education providers will be able to enrol from 2012 onwards. That is a great move and, if successful, it will be a very positive outcome for our nation.

This funding is intended to put the student at the centre. The ambition is that by 2025 40 per cent of all 25- to 34-year-olds will hold a qualification at bachelor level or above. The implications for our nation are enormous and necessary in a highly competitive, globalised world. The second key target recommended by the Bradley review is that by 2020 20 per cent of university enrolments at undergraduate level be for people from low-socioeconomic-status backgrounds. The bill introduces landmark measures to improve the rate of participation in higher education by students from disadvantaged backgrounds. The bill amends the act to provide an increase in funding to address Australia’s historically poor record in increasing the participation of low-socioeconomic status students.

The government has announced a commitment to ensure that by 2020 20 per cent of higher education enrolments at the undergraduate level will be people from a low-socioeconomic status background. This goal will be directly supported by the injection of additional funding for universities to support the low-SES participation targets. The major barriers to increased higher education participation by students from low-socioeconomic backgrounds include previous educational attainment; low awareness of the long-term benefits of higher education, resulting in little aspiration to participate; and the need for financial assistance and academic and personal support once they are enrolled. These are significant barriers that we need to tackle systematically.

International experience shows that interventions or outreach in the early years of secondary schooling are highly effective in increasing the aspirations of students to attend university. The government has therefore allocated $108 million over four years for a new partnership program to link universities with low-socioeconomic status schools and vocational education and training providers. The intention is to create leading practice and competitive pressures to increase the aspirations of low-SES students to higher education.

The government is putting in place systemic reasons for universities to be engaged with improving the quality of school education—in short, to have programs whereby there is an interconnection between the higher education institutions and those people who are going to make up its population: school students. It makes sense to develop a systematic interrelationship, a communication system, to ensure contact between higher education and students, particularly in secondary schools—and probably even before then, quite frankly. One of the great barriers to retention in years 10, 11 and 12 and then at university is the disconnectedness between the various sectors in education, and probably none more so than between higher education and their potential students in high schools.

Funding will provide schools and vocational education and training providers with links to universities, exposing their students to people, places and opportunities beyond the scope of their own experiences and helping teachers raise the aspirations of their students. I would add that, in trying to do that, you have to help those who have a great influence on children—and apart from teachers and peers, of course, it is parents. Many children aspire because their parents aspire for them. This is a deep-seated trend in our community and will take some time. But this is a very, very important initiative and hopefully it not only gets to students but also gets to their parents. Programs might include scholarships, mentoring of teachers and students, curriculum and teaching support or hands-on activities run by university staff in schools. There is an initiative in my electorate of Braddon which has the very practical component of getting support into schools to teach science and to then have the students go on to do science at university. I commend the legislation. (Time expired)

Kirsten Livermore (Capricornia, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

This Higher Education Support Amendment (2009 Budget Measures) Bill 2009 is taking us on the first steps down the road of a comprehensive and far-reaching reform of Australia’s higher education system. It is a reform process that will address the decay in public investment in the higher education sector that occurred in the last decade or so under the previous Howard government. That record of neglect has seen Australia fall behind the rest of our competitors in terms of public spending on education, at a time when they have grasped the central role that education plays in increasing economic prosperity and improving equity in their societies. We knew when we took government that we could not achieve our vision of a stronger and fairer Australia without addressing the structural and financial problems in our higher education sector.

The Bradley review of higher education commissioned by our government last year identified the task ahead of us in terms of greater participation in higher education, more funding targeted at meeting student demand and a focus on quality. Denise Bradley’s report laid down a challenge to the government and it is one that we will not fail. This legislation enacts one part of the government’s broader response to the Bradley review that was announced in the budget. In doing so, it heralds a new approach which sees higher education firmly at the centre of our economic productivity and social inclusion agenda. In short, it is about taking us toward a future where we have a high-quality university education system comparable to the best in the OECD by 2020, particularly when looking at access, learning outcomes, engagement and research. We will not achieve this goal on our current path.

As an indication of just how significant the required change is, the government has set bold targets for lifting the rate of participation in higher education within the Australian population. Currently, 32 per cent of 25- to 34-year-olds have a bachelor’s degree. If current policy settings continue, that is projected to rise to just 34 per cent by 2020. We think Australia can do better. If we are to retain our standard of living and our international competitiveness, we have to do better. That is why the Minister for Education announced that our government is aiming for 40 per cent of Australians aged from 25 to 34 to have a bachelor’s degree or higher by 2025. That equates to an additional 217,000 graduates. We will not reach that target unless we also tackle the persistent divide that exists between those sections of the community who have traditionally gone to university and those who have not had that opportunity. Lifting raw participation rates is one thing but the government and our educational institutions need to go further to encourage and support participation in higher education by those traditionally underrepresented groups—people from low-socioeconomic backgrounds, people from rural and regional areas and Indigenous students.

So, in addition to our overall 40 per cent target, the government want 20 per cent of people enrolled in higher education to come from groups who are currently underrepresented in the system and we want this to happen by 2020. This 20 per cent target for low-socioeconomic status students is one of the key findings of the Bradley review and represents a substantial increase from where we are now with just 15 per cent of students identified as low SES. It is no easy task, but this legislation lays the framework for us to achieve such ambitious and worthwhile targets.

We recognise that it is not enough for the government to set targets, then expect universities to be able to go out and overnight recruit thousands of students from non-traditional backgrounds and then have those students magically graduate in four years. We are talking about students who have no experience of university. They are from country towns with no higher education institutions; they are the first person in their family to attend university; they come from non-English-speaking backgrounds; they are Indigenous and come to university after previous bad experiences in the school system. Universities and schools will need support and financial resources to first of all encourage these students to enrol and to see university as part of their life. There will then need to be additional support available to overcome some of the barriers that might stand in the way of students’ academic success and completion of their degree.

The government has therefore put aside $108 million to be used over the next four years for a partnership program linking universities with low-SES schools and $325 million to universities to fund the intensive support needed to improve the completion and retention rates of students from low-SES backgrounds. That represents an additional $394 million over the next four years directed towards the goal of lifting participation rates of students who have not in the past gone to uni in large numbers. This measure is firmly targeted at electorates like mine in Central Queensland, where the participation rate in higher education is well below the national average. I believe it will also reward the work of unis like the one in my electorate, CQ University Australia, by recognising that encouraging and supporting non-traditional students through their uni experience should be a key function of universities—one we require of all universities and one that should be rewarded when done well.

Over the years, CQ uni has consistently had one of the highest percentages of all Australian universities when it comes to the number of students from low-SES backgrounds, Indigenous students and students who are the first in their family to undertake university education. The university also has just been awarded five stars for access by the Good Universities Guide. I know the commitment that is there at CQ University to achieve those results. I know the staff involved and the programs that are run, and CQ University is right to be proud of its achievements in this important area.

CQ University has done that because of where it is located and because part of its mission is to serve the needs of Central Queensland. But it is not easy, and it is right that all universities, not just regional unis, should now be required to take that responsibility seriously and have their performance in that task measured and results rewarded. This legislation ensures that that will happen. It provides for a new performance funding grant element under the Commonwealth Grant Scheme, which will be conditional in 2011 and fully operational from 2012. It will ensure that Australia’s reputation for quality teaching and learning remains high by providing universities with a real incentive to ensure that they are providing the best possible learning opportunities for students and investing the effort necessary to help underrepresented students achieve their study goals. This will encourage universities to continue to raise the bar with student achievement and learning. After all, the government understands that it is not just about student numbers in a lecture theatre. The students also have to achieve good learning outcomes.

The government will work with universities to establish performance indicators to lay the framework for this funding. These will include the success of various demographics of the student population. These targets will be challenging but appropriate for the circumstances of universities. From 2012, universities will receive this funding if they agree on and meet new targets, and this process will be assessed independently through the Tertiary Education Quality and Standards Agency. Universities will be able to negotiate targets and they will know what is at stake if they do not meet the targets.

I have already referred to the university in my own electorate of Capricornia, CQ University, where the commitment to serving the educational and research needs of our region is stronger than ever. The university has a new vice-chancellor, Professor Scott Bowman, who is enthusiastic and upbeat about the university, and he has a great team around him. With the government’s reform agenda for higher education starting to be implemented, the university, under its new leadership, is well placed to show that it is ready to take up the challenges ahead and indeed can earn some well-deserved recognition and reward for some of its traditional strengths.

With Professor Bowman only a fortnight in the job, his chair is barely warm, but already he is demonstrating that he is the right person for the job. CQ University, with its campuses across the region and interstate, needs someone with his experience and willingness to engage the community, industry and government to move it into the future. After all, the university is not without challenges. A Queensland Treasury Corporation report released recently highlighted that there has been a decline in international and domestic enrolments at CQ University.

Professor Bowman acknowledged this point in his opening address to staff a couple of weeks ago and has also outlined a path to success for the university, setting targets for the next two, five and 10 years. He said that the work would start immediately by refreshing courses, investing in new programs and putting strategies in place that will attract more full-time students to all of the university’s campuses. I quote from the speech he delivered to about 300 staff, in which he talked about the strategic position of the university and its campuses. He said:

We have to use our geographical location to our best advantage over the coming years to strengthen our links with industry, develop new programs, and fully serve the needs of local communities …

In 10 years, CQUniversity will be known as one of Australia’s great universities and as an employer of choice in the sector.

I am sure everyone in Rockhampton and the region also wants this for the university. As the local member, I certainly do and I will be working to assist the university in any way that I can in the months and years ahead as it find its place in the new future for higher education that our policy is creating. It is pleasing to see strong leadership and vision at the university coinciding with this legislation at the federal level, which will provide a boost to higher education.

This long-term mission for increasing enrolments at CQ University is critical for the university as it works with this legislation into the future. After all, this legislation is also about providing incentives for enrolments and setting benchmarks for education. By setting goals now, CQ University is positioning itself ideally. I do not need to tell the management of the university that they do not have a moment to lose.

As a part of our response to the Bradley review, this legislation sets in place the new student-driven scheme for funding universities in Australia. From 2012, all public universities will be funded on the basis of student demand. To allow for the introduction of a demand-driven system, the bill amends the act to remove the maximum grant amount for the Commonwealth Grants Scheme for 2012. The allocation of funding to universities on the basis of student demand for places at individual institutions presents a challenge to CQU with its recent history of falling enrolments. But our policy and this bill give universities two years to prepare for the new system. I know that it is time that CQU will use wisely.

The current funding floor for universities will be maintained for 2010 and 2011. In that time, CQ University can take advantage of other parts of the package—for example, the structural adjustment money and incentives for enrolling students from non-traditional backgrounds to consolidate—and develop the mission and niche that will carry it forward. Of course, the university will also benefit from the new and long awaited indexation arrangements in this bill that better reflect the true costs of education provision, especially wages costs for academic and general staff.

The structural adjustment funding in particular will be important for a university like CQ Uni that has so much to offer and has a region that needs it to succeed. This part of the package is telling universities to work out: what are your opportunities, what needs do you meet, what do you do well and how do you see your future? It then supports the uni to achieve those goals. To support the transformation that will inevitably take place, the government is providing $400 million over four years for structural adjustment. This means that universities will be able to take the reins and make strategic decisions about their own futures. There is a $200 million capital component to this funding and all of this funding will support broader strategic and capital projects.

To ensure their long-term sustainability, regional unis are also looking to the government to overhaul the system of regional loading. Throughout 2009 the government will continue to work with universities such as CQ University to identify the specific issues facing regional provision. We will fully consider the issues surrounding regional provision and the impacts of a demand focus for funding, which will roll out in coming years with this legislation.

It is true to say that Labor governments in the past have been at the forefront of delivering important reform to the tertiary education sector. These reforms, whether they were through the Whitlam or Hawke governments, have helped Australia to the position it is in today. Labor government reforms have opened the doors of education to broad sectors of the community, increased participation and improved the productivity and efficiency of higher education. Australia as a nation is the better for it.

As noted in the Bradley review, past reforms have led to increased performance of the sector overall. However, under the 11 years of the Howard government the higher education sector had been a victim of neglect. Indeed, in cases such as student services, the coalition is still attempting to wage a tired old ideological war against students and their tertiary education.

Today these Rudd government reforms being debated are critical for the sector and for our nation. In fact an OECD report makes the same point as the Bradley review and underlines the urgency of these reforms:

The widespread recognition that tertiary education is a major driver of economic competitiveness in an increasingly knowledge-driven global economy has made high-quality tertiary education more important than ever before. The imperative for countries is to raise higher-level employment skills, to sustain a globally competitive research base and to improve knowledge dissemination for the benefit of society.

We see that as a central role for government, and this legislation is another step towards achieving that vision. I commend the bill to the House.

Kate Ellis (Adelaide, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Early Childhood Education, Childcare and Youth) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I begin by commending the previous speaker both for her contribution to this debate and also for her ongoing commitment to higher education within her own community and indeed thank all members who have spoken on the bill. The Higher Education Support Amendment (2009 Budget Measures) Bill 2009 amends the Higher Education Support Act 2003 to implement the Australian government’s reform of the higher education system as announced in the 2009-10 budget. It responds to the review of Australian higher education, the Bradley review, which affirmed that the reach, quality and performance of a nation’s higher education system will be the key determinants of its economic and social progress.

The bill is a landmark in the history of Australian higher education. Put simply, this bill transforms the scale, potential and quality of our nation’s universities. It introduces the first stage of a new higher education system with students at its centre, where there is a Commonwealth supported place for every eligible undergraduate student accepted into a course at an eligible higher education provider. The bill also amends the act to give effect to measures to address key findings and recommendations of the review of the national innovation system and the recent House of Representatives inquiry into research, training and workforce issues.

Alongside a student centred system, the government is also introducing measures to ensure quality, address Australia’s skill needs and the broader public interest, and support achievement of our higher education attainment goals. This ambition is that, by 2025, 40 per cent of all 25- to 34-year-olds will hold a qualification at bachelor level or above. We will introduce the student centred system gradually. The bill provides for the cap on funding for overenrolment in Commonwealth supported places to be lifted from five per cent to 10 per cent in funding terms in 2010 and 2011. This will have an estimated cost of $491 million over four years.

The bill also removes the limit on funding under the Commonwealth Grants Scheme for 2012 to reflect the fact that there will be no overall limit on the number of students that table A higher education providers will be able to enrol from 2012 onwards. The bill takes the steps necessary to open Australia’s universities to a new generation of students. It amends the act to provide for an increase in funding to encourage increased participation by low-SES students. Our goal is to ensure that, by 2020, 20 per cent of higher education enrolments at the undergraduate level will be people from a low-SES background. This goal will be directly supported by the injection of additional funding for universities to support the low-SES participation targets.

The government has allocated $108 million over four years for a new partnerships program to link universities with low-SES schools and vocational education and training providers. The intention is to create leading practice and competitive pressures to increase the aspirations of low-SES students to higher education. The government is putting in place systemic reasons for universities to be engaged with improving the quality of school education. Funding will provide schools and vocational educational and training providers with links to universities, exposing their students to people, places and opportunities beyond the scope of their own experiences, helping teachers raise the aspirations of their students. Programs might include scholarships, mentoring of teachers and students, curriculum and teaching support or hands-on activities run by university staff in schools.

Once students from disadvantaged backgrounds have entered university, they generally do very well. Often, however, they require higher levels of support to succeed, including financial assistance and greater academic support, mentoring and counselling services. The government has therefore allocated $325 million over four years to be provided to universities as a financial incentive to expand their enrolment of low-SES students and to fund the intensive support needed to improve their completion and retention rates. The existing Higher Education Equity Support Program will be replaced and incorporated into these new funding arrangements. Better measures of low socioeconomic status will be developed which are based on the circumstances of individual students and their families. Performance funding will be based in part on how effective institutions are in attracting these students.

The steps to improve low-SES student participation will impact on and benefit Indigenous students also. They are significantly underrepresented in our universities and they face distinct challenges. The government will support a review of the effectiveness of measures to improve the participation of Indigenous students in higher education in consultation with the Indigenous Higher Education Advisory Council. At the same time, the government is also introducing major reforms to student income support to assist the access and retention of low-SES students.

The bill amends the act to provide funding for the continuing elements of the Commonwealth Scholarships program. Existing Commonwealth Education Cost Scholarships recipients will continue to receive the scholarships under current arrangements. The CECSs will be replaced by the Student Start-Up Scholarships. A Student Start-Up Scholarship of $2,254 in 2010 and indexed thereafter will be provided as an entitlement to all university students receiving income support and those under veteran schemes. This compares to the current system where in 2009 around 13.7 per cent of commencing student income support recipients at university received a Commonwealth Education Cost Scholarship. The Student Start-Up Scholarships are estimated to benefit 146,600 students in 2010, up from the 12,900 Commonwealth Education Cost Scholarships that would have been offered to commencing students under the current system.

Existing Commonwealth Accommodation Scholarship recipients will continue to receive their scholarships under the current arrangements. CAS will be replaced by the new Relocation Scholarship in 2010. University students receiving youth allowance and Abstudy who have to live away from the family home to study will be assisted by a Relocation Scholarship. This will be available to dependent students living away from home as well as independent students who are disadvantaged by personal circumstances. The Relocation Scholarship will provide $4,000 for students in their first year at university and $1,000 in each year thereafter, and it will be indexed. An estimated 14,200 students will benefit from this measure in 2010—a 75 per cent increase on the number of Commonwealth Accommodation Scholarships which were to be offered that year. By comparison to the current system, in 2009 about 8.7 per cent of commencing students on income support received a Commonwealth Accommodation Scholarship. Indigenous students will continue to receive scholarships under the Commonwealth Scholarships scheme in the future.

The bill makes a provision for an historic increase to university indexation, ending more than a decade of real and brutalising cuts under the previous government. Revised indexation arrangements from 2012 for programs funded under the Higher Education Support Act 2003 will promote improved quality by ensuring that funding for teaching, learning and research keeps pace with increasing costs. This will contribute towards the overall financial stability and viability of the higher education sector and will provide greater certainty for individual institutions when planning for future development.

The bill will amend the act to increase the maximum annual student contribution amounts for students studying education and nursing units from the current national priority rate to the band 1 rate, providing extra revenue for higher education providers that will be available to improve resourcing of education and nursing courses. The HECS-HELP guidelines made under the act will be amended to extend this benefit to graduates of initial teaching and nursing degrees who go on to work as teachers and nurses. Extending the benefit will not only encourage new students into the field; it will also encourage graduates to enter and stay in these professions.

The bill will amend the act so that from 1 January 2010 students who receive an OS-HELP loan will no longer incur a 20 per cent loan fee. The removal of the loan fee will assist universities in encouraging students to undertake part of the studies for their Australian qualifications at an overseas institution. This will improve the productivity benefits to Australia of students undertaking overseas study.

A central feature of the reform agenda will be an increased focus on quality. This will be especially important in a period of growth, when institutions will attract students who have not traditionally considered going to university. The bill reflects the new arrangements for quality and standards which will be initiated during 2009 and 2010, with work commencing on establishing a new standards based quality assurance framework. Funding under the act for the Australian Universities Quality Agency will be replaced with new arrangements to support the development and establishment of the Tertiary Education Quality and Standards Agency by 2010.

Universities will be accountable for the quality of their learning and teaching and their efforts to improve outcomes for students from equity groups. At-risk funding tied to their performance in these areas will be introduced. Each university will be required to enter into an agreement with the Australian government to meet individual performance targets for teaching and learning as well as the attainment and participation of those students who are currently underrepresented in higher education. The targets will be based on robust performance indicators that will be developed in close consultation with the sector over the coming year.

In 2011 those universities that have agreed targets will receive a facilitation payment representing a share of more than $90 million. This funding will help them to position themselves to meet their targets. In 2012 up to $135 million will be distributed to the universities that have met their targets. The new Tertiary Education Quality and Standards Agency will provide an independent assessment of whether universities have met these targets.

It may take some time for the higher education sector to adjust to the reforms arising from the Bradley review. A new structural adjustment fund has been established to support transformation in the sector and will be available to universities to enable them to develop diverse missions. This funding will promote long-term sustainability in the sector by assisting individual universities to make strategic decisions about their future missions and ways to enhance their place in the new higher education environment. The new fund will also lay the groundwork for the provision of more sustainable higher education in regional areas ahead of decisions being taken about funding models for regional delivery.

Universities play a pivotal role in the national research and innovation system through the generation and dissemination of new knowledge and through the education, training and development of world-class researchers. Amendments to the act will assist universities to address the current gap in funding for the indirect costs of research. The Sustainable Research Excellence in Universities initiative aims to raise the average support for the indirect cost of university research to 50c per dollar of direct competitive grant funding by 2014. The measure will also provide greater accountability for public investment in university research.

Through the joint research engagement measures, the bill will encourage universities to diversify their sources of research income and increase collaboration with industry and other end users. The postgraduate research students support measure will ensure Australia’s research students are adequately supported in order to improve Australia’s capacity to attract the best research students needed to sustain our research workforce into the future. The bill’s reform agenda will be underpinned by the increase to HESA indexation to better reflect actual increases in costs associated with research and research training.

The bill will enable Australia to achieve a university research sector that produces world-class research, that is responsive to end-user needs and that attracts the best and brightest minds to develop the skills that underpin Australia’s innovative capacity. Measures in the bill are complemented by additional investments of $2.1 billion from the Education Investment Fund for education and research infrastructure and $1.1 billion for the Super Science Initiative. Taken together, these comprehensive reforms will invigorate the higher education sector, fund a new era of student participation and promote new benchmarks of educational excellence.

The tertiary education revolution will change and enlarge Australia’s economic potential. The investments and reforms will drive improvements in productivity and create a smarter and more competitive economic future for Australia. For these reasons I urge all members to support the bill and commend it to the House.

Question agreed to.

Bill read a second time.

Message from the Governor-General recommending appropriation announced.