House debates

Wednesday, 13 June 2007

Higher Education Legislation Amendment (2007 Budget Measures) Bill 2007

Consideration in Detail

Bill—by leave—taken as a whole.

6:43 pm

Photo of Stephen SmithStephen Smith (Perth, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Education and Training) Share this | | Hansard source

by leave—I move opposition amendments (1) and (2):

(1)    Schedule 5, item 1, page 13 (lines 6-7), omit the item.

(2)    Schedule 5, item 2, page 13 (lines 8-14), omit the item.

These amendments relate to the government’s removal of the cap on full-fee paying places: the 35 per cent general cap and the 25 per cent cap for medical places. The substance of that debate was outlined by me in the course of my second reading debate remarks. I again simply make the point that when the full-fee paying places were introduced to public universities there was a so-called gentlemen’s agreement which was supposed to have the effect that the difference between the entry levels for the government supported HECS places and the full-fee paying places would not be greater than five points.

As I have indicated previously, we now find those differences ranging anywhere from nearly 20 points to over 12 points. That so-called gentlemen’s agreement has been honoured almost entirely in the breach. If the government, as was suggested at the time, had regulated by way of legislation or regulation then we would not see those disparities now. Secondly, we know the Prime Minister is famous for his assertion that there would never be $100,000 degrees, but we now see very many of those around the country. Labor believes that it is wrong for the government to remove the full-fee-paying place cap of 35 per cent generally and 25 per cent for medical places. In any event, as the minister noted in his second reading reply remarks, Labor’s policy is to phase out those full-fee-paying places, and upon election we will do that commencing on 1 January 2009. I have indicated to the minister that, to suit the convenience of the House, we are not proposing to divide on these matters, given the time. To suit the convenience of members these matters are referred to in the second reading amendments and the House will not underestimate or underappreciate the firmness of our views in this respect.

Question negatived.

Bill agreed to.