Julian Hill (Bruce, Australian Labor Party, Assistant Minister for Citizenship, Customs and Multicultural Affairs) Share this | Hansard source

I listened carefully to a few of the opposition speakers, and I feel sorry for them, in that it must be quite painful sitting on the barbed-wire fence. On one hand, there were some very good points made there—they were quoting some of the Senate submissions—but, on the other, I'm still none the wiser as to whether they support the bill or oppose the bill. Time will tell. There were a lot of feelings, a lot of opinions, a lot of anxieties and a lot of worries, but there was not much clarity or anything even resembling a policy or a voting position.

This is a huge reform, though, for the tertiary education system. I think it'll take years or decades for Australians to look back and realise just what a significant moment this is—to recreate an independent commission to steward the tertiary education system, in particular the universities, but not only the universities. And I'll get to that.

I just want to affirm one thing the previous speaker said, and that is about the importance of regional education, and then I'll go back to the substance of the Universities Accord (Australian Tertiary Education Commission) Bill 2025. This government agrees with the importance of regional education. It's one of the reasons we've put in place the university study hubs—to improve access to education for regional and outer suburban students—but there's a really big systemic reform. I'm not going to take lectures, the sanctimony or the little backhanders suggesting that somehow the government's been against regional education. It's quite the opposite. Under their whole previous term of government, a regional student was funded exactly the same as a metropolitan student, even though everyone knew it cost more to teach a regional student than a metropolitan student. In response, over the last couple of decades, many of the regional universities have set up these CBD campuses to teach students, often international students, in the cities; make a bit of profit; clip the ticket; and pass the profit back to help fund the cost of teaching regional students.

I'm not going to victim-blame like many in the opposition are doing or like the Menzies Research Centre's ridiculous, dodgy so-called research paper they put out a couple of weeks ago using data that was either three years old or that was just made up—it didn't exist. It was a rational response by the regional vice-chancellors to deal with the structural funding problems. We're putting in a regional student funding load to add a load so that a student taught in a regional area will get some extra funding, as they should.

I also heard of the coalition's love and fondness for the university sector. I would remind the member opposite—I don't know whether he was a member here under the former Morrison regime, the cabal, with its secret ministries and dodgy decisions. He got up one budget, and they cut $3 billion from the university sector. The question was 'what are they going to do about that?', and he said, 'You should just go and recruit more international students.' And then, at the same time, the same prime minister and the mob opposite were saying the universities have gone and recruited too many international students—to make up for the funding that the Liberals and the Nationals cut.

Back to the substance of the bill. It introduces an independent commission to steward the system. The last commission was created, I think, in 1943 by the Curtin Labor government, by John Curtin. It was under Curtin's influence, actually, that the Commonwealth government began to take a bigger role and a bigger interest, structurally and systemically, in education, which, constitutionally, was primarily a matter for regulation by the states. The Universities Commission was set up first in 1943, but, by July 1945, Commonwealth policy under the Curtin government and then the Chifley government provided for the establishment of a Commonwealth office for education, legislation to place the Universities Commission on a more permanent basis, grants to universities to meet the costs of buildings and facilities and associated expenditure connected with the Commonwealth Reconstruction Training Scheme, and the establishment of a truly national university. In fact, it is still the only university that's regulated by Commonwealth statute created by the Commonwealth—the Australian National University. They were big changes.

Then, in 1988, as part of the Dawkins reforms under the Hawke Labor government, the judgement was taken that that system had run its race, and the previous Universities Commission was abolished. It did set the system up for incredible success. For all the culture wars and the bagging of universities—there are some social licence issues, no doubt. I met with the Go8 vice-chancellors this morning, here in Canberra, and had a pretty direct discussion about some of that. But, for all the culture wars that abound, we have incredible universities in this country. If there's anything that punches above its weight, surely it's our university system.

Three per cent of the world's research and knowledge output is generated here in Australia, which is well above its population share. We have multiple universities ranked globally in the top 100. That's something we can be proud of, but it's a choice we make as a country. We can choose to fund universities properly, to fund research and create new knowledge, or we can choose not to. Well, this government chooses to chase excellence. Those 1988 reforms set the system up for success. They expanded access to university to millions of Australians who were previously locked out and improved research quality. They set up the institutions for success. But the truth is like any big structural reforms the world changes, and they've run their race. Indeed, many of the architects of those reforms I've seen quoted as contributing—through this debate, from the accord and in other things like this that have flowed from the accord—have said they're surprised that some of those reforms lasted as long as they have.

The government's judgement, flowing from the accord, is that we need to move past the system that we've created where every university—metropolitan, regional, research intensive, teaching intensive, highly ranked or focused on access—operates under the same incentives, the same funding structure and the same requirements. One of the key recommendations from the accord is to have a trusted, independent commission to steward the system. I acknowledge the previous speaker's comments about seeking reassurance that the ATEC, the Australian Tertiary Education Commission, is intended to steward the system and not be another regulator. That is indeed what the bill provides, and that is the government's intention.

As well as universities, I'll give a shout out to the non-university higher ed providers, who are commonly called private providers or colleges. They teach a large number of students in Australia, international and domestic, and the ATEC needs to have a role in understanding and shaping their contribution to the system, but it also needs to take a broader view for vocational education and training to create a better, more joined-up system to break down the 'black and white' barrier between TAFEs, VET and higher education. This is a critical part of meeting the government's bold target, an ambitious target, to see 80 per cent of Australians in the workforce have some kind of tertiary education qualification by 2050. It's not university snobbery, as some might say. It includes certificates, diplomas, graduate diplomas and vocational education and training. The system needs to be more integrated, and we need to value all parts of the tertiary system.

Tertiary education is absolutely critical for our country's prosperity. It changes people's lives—individually but also collectively—it creates new knowledge, it supports society to solve important challenges and problems, and it supports industry to apply that knowledge. This Labor government's focus on education builds on a fine Labor tradition. It's not about equality of outcome; it's about equality of opportunity. Every kid in Australia, no matter where they're born and no matter their family upbringing or their economic circumstances, should have the same access to education and a fair crack at life. John Curtin's belief in the value of education never dimmed. In 1932 he wrote:

The pursuit of knowledge is far more important than even knowledge itself.

That is why the Labor movement has always striven, even passionately, for educative opportunities for all. It's my mum's story, it's been part of my family's story, and it's the story of many people in this chamber—first in family to go to university or TAFE or even to complete year 12.

This is a bold goal, and it can only be achieved with big changes. One change is in how the system is steered, which is the ATEC—long after many of us are here, the Tertiary Education Commission should still be there steering and shaping the system to fulfil those goals in the accord. Another change is in how the system is funded. I touched on some of that, but if time permits I'll mention more of that. We need to focus, though, if we're going to achieve that goal, on certain parts of Australia and particularly on the regions, the outer suburbs and disadvantaged communities where participation is low.

There are many parts of our cities, particularly the wealthier suburbs, where frankly those kids are going to go to university anyway or will pursue TAFE if that's what they wish. But there are many parts of our cities, including in some parts that I represent, where the participation of young Australians in post-school education is far, far lower than the wealthier parts of our country. So the ATEC is going to have to focus on what the system needs to do, what universities need to do and what the vocational training system needs to do as an adjunct to get those young Australians into tertiary education.

I agree with the previous speaker's contribution too that it's not all from school to tertiary education. Life is not a linear progression these days. Many people will go in and out of the tertiary education system while they're working, whether it's for sabbaticals and study breaks or blending study with work as they go on through their lives.

It does mean changing the funding, though, so that students not currently going into tertiary education are supported to do so. That's what free TAFE is about, and I acknowledge the work of the Minister for Skills and Training and the Prime Minister's focus on free TAFE, which as of, I think, the last couple of weeks marks its three-year anniversary. We've seen more than 775,000 free TAFE enrolments and more than 210,000 completions, with hundreds of thousands of students still studying. It contrasts with the contribution of the now opposition leader—well, she's today's opposition leader; we'll see what tomorrow brings, or Wednesday or Thursday or Friday; we'll see if she lasts the week—on free TAFE: 'It was a waste of money, and, if you don't pay for it, you don't value it.' Well, hundreds of thousands of Australians have said they do value study in these critical skills shortage areas, and that's a good thing for our country.

Also, there are study hubs. There are 20 regional and 14 suburban study hubs, which are about bringing higher education closer to those students who are not able to access campuses or whose families or family circumstances have meant they're not able to access, or haven't had the support to access, tertiary education. I was very pleased on behalf of the minister last year to launch the Melton study hub in outer-western Melbourne.

See this speech in context