Sam Birrell (Nicholls, National Party, Shadow Assistant Minister for Regional Health) Share this | Hansard source

I, too, rise to speak on the Universities Accord (Australian Tertiary Education Commission) Bill 2025 and the Universities Accord (Australian Tertiary Education Commission) (Consequential and Transitional Provisions) Bill 2025. I acknowledge the support for the principle of ATEC in the university sector, but, given the flaws, omissions and governance issues in this legislation, I have reservations about a further bureaucracy in the tertiary sector and the way that that bureaucracy would be structured and operate. The Nationals and the coalition believe in less regulation and less red tape, not more of it. The combination of additional regulation and duplication, or regulatory overlap, is even less desirable.

I also have concerns about the lack of regional representation on the commission. This is a great concern, and it goes against the recommendations of the accord report for the ATEC board to include several further commissioners, including an equity commissioner and a regional education commissioner. There are also concerns around the lack of independence in ATEC. ATEC will prepare reports and provide advice and recommendations if requested by the minister, and the minister will dictate what it should be providing advice on.

The bills enshrine a national tertiary education objective for which ATEC must have regard—among other things, driving a national, economic and social development and environmental sustainability, as recommended in the report. ATEC, around these parameters, will negotiate new tailored mission based compacts. What are those missions, and on what basis are they driving national, economic and social development and environmental sustainability? Those things, and how to achieve those aspects in our country—and what those aspects even are—are highly contested, including in this place. I would hate to see the tertiary sector, via a commission, be the instrument through which a minister of the day directs it to try and drive a certain type of ideology.

In terms of regional education, standalone regional universities and universities that have committed long-term to regional campuses should be specifically recognised in any commission and in any focus on any bureaucracy—indeed, by the existing department—on growth funding and sustainability. We must have comfort around what an additional layer of bureaucracy will achieve in the tertiary sector, and we should have questions in respect to the cost of ATEC. ATEC will cost $54 million. That's $54 million for a bureaucracy that is designed to direct. Not one cent of that $54 million goes to students or their actual education. So it's another layer of education bureaucracy delivered at considerable cost. Will it deliver what we need, and is it merely going to duplicate things that are being done or should be being done by the Department of Education?

Many people in this place have talked about how important tertiary education is and what an incredible impact it can have on people's and families' lives. It's the same with me. I've always thought, when it comes to tertiary education, particularly in this day and age as opposed to previously—previously tertiary education was seen as something you did when you left school, but, now, it's becoming something that people can access at different times in their lives—that when people can access tertiary education is critically important. Being from a regional electorate, I argue strongly that where they can access tertiary education is extremely important. Tertiary education needs to be relevant to critical thinking and the contest of ideas. I worry that the way this legislation is worded tries to direct the tertiary sector in certain directions without that overlay of critical thinking and a battle of ideas.

The coalition has a strong record of supporting universities, particularly regional universities. In my own electorate, the previous coalition government funded an expansion of the La Trobe University campus, and that has had a significant impact on the delivery of tertiary education opportunities for people who, for a variety of reasons, can't go to capital cities to participate. In addition, one of the great initiatives of the previous coalition government, working together with the tertiary sector, was to develop the medicine pathway of the Bachelor of Biomedical Science undergraduate degree, leading into a Doctor of Medicine postgraduate degree. Apart from the James Cook program in Townsville, it's the first time there's been a regional end-to-end medical degree. The first lot of graduates graduated earlier this year, and I was there to see that. Talking to these students—these are students who would never have got involved and would never have done a medical degree if they had had to go to a city to do it. But, because it was offered in their hometown—namely, in greater Shepparton—we are going to get some fabulous new, young doctors who have a regional focus.

In addition, my own experience is of a Bachelor of Agricultural Science, which I completed at the Dookie campus of the University of Melbourne. It is commendable that a university such as the University of Melbourne has a commitment to a regional campus and a regional area and to agricultural science, which is best delivered in the regions.

ATEC was one of the recommendations from the Australian Universities Accord report. This was published in February 2024. The legislation enshrines the national tertiary education objective, which I've spoken about. On 27 November 2025, these bills were referred to the Senate Education and Employment Legislation Committee. The committee is due to report towards the end of this month—on 26 February, I believe. I, and others around the parliament, will be very interested in their findings and recommendations. Perhaps, it would have been wise to get those findings and recommendations as part of helping draft this legislation.

The same committee held a previous inquiry into the quality of governance at Australian higher education providers, and it reported in December 2025, and additional opposition comments noted, the 'increasingly dense and fragmented regulatory environment' that the tertiary education sector faced. If they're saying that there's an increasingly dense and fragmented regulatory environment, and we add another layer of bureaucracy, is that regulatory environment going to become more dense and fragmented?

I acknowledged earlier the support within the sector for ATEC, but it's not unequivocal. I just want to touch on some of the submissions to the inquiry. Regional Universities Network were supportive of the establishment of ATEC, but proposed amendments to the bill. Those amendments were around flexibility to adjust the number of commissioners and a need to provide robust, unprompted advice to government at its own discretion, including on the student contribution component of higher education and on university research, training and infrastructure. Regional Universities Network recommended specific mentions of students' teaching and learning, research and research training as well as equity, participation and attainment, and the need to acknowledge and preserve that institutional diversity that exists within the system. The Regional Universities Network, unsurprisingly, said that ATEC should have more commissioners, and that one of those commissioners should be a regional commissioner. That is not part of this legislation.

Likewise, Charles Sturt University were supportive in principle but suggested, again, at least five commissioners, consistent with the accord, supported by secretariat staff with people with experience in tertiary education in regional settings, regional consideration embedded into governance and funding provided for the high costs associated with regional teaching, research and infrastructure.

Universities Australia had qualified support. They wanted ATEC to be independent and properly resourced, with the ministerial veto over ATEC's work program, inquiries and publications to be removed. They wanted ATEC to be clarified as a strategic steward, not a regulator, to avoid duplication with TEQSA.

Federation University were the same—in-principle support with issues to be addressed to embed a place based equity guarantee and mission based compacts so that students can study locally. They recommended clarifying how ATEC balances ministerial priorities, equity objectives and community need when setting compacts. Federation University also said that equity and regional participation experts should be included in ATEC leadership appointments. So you can see the flavour of both those universities those operate solely in the regions and also those that have a strong regional presence, including the University of Melbourne and La Trobe University in my electorate. They want any type of commission to have a very strong regional focus with a regional commissioner.

An interim ATEC is already operating, and the legislation will enshrine its operations and authority. I think that clearly there are issues that still need to be addressed and improvements that can be made. I think those improvements may be identified by the Senate inquiry when it releases its report later this month. I think there are a lot of elements and a big question to ask as to what the Department of Education will do. What should it be doing that ATEC seeks to do? There are questions about the crossover and duplication of that.

I'll go back to clause 13, on the national tertiary education objective. I think we all agree with the bit about promoting a strong, equitable and resilient democracy. But, on the bit about 'driving national, economic and social development and environmental sustainability', I put that the university sector should focus on the objectives of teaching, learning and research. Those objectives of teaching, learning and research should be aimed at promoting a dynamic and innovative sector that provides a positive student experience, promotes critical thinking and the contest of ideas, delivers value for money and improves Australia's productivity, and supports Australian values. On those last two points, productivity is something that absolutely needs to improve in Australia. We are lagging behind, and many of the economic headwinds we are facing are there because of our productivity challenges.

In addition, the Australian values, which we hold so dear, are under threat. I think we all need to accept that. Sometimes they're under threat from a lack of a robust, challenged contest of ideas in the tertiary sector. I think we need to acknowledge that because our social cohesion depends on it. In conclusion, we have many reservations about the ATEC concept and, particularly, with the way this bill has been drafted. Thank you.

See this speech in context