Andrew Giles (Scullin, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question is to the Prime Minister. I refer to Professor Bruce Chapman's statement in the Australian today in relation to the government's latest bungled plan on universities:

I still expect that prices, at least for the Group of Eight strong demand courses, will be at least two and a half times higher.

Can the Prime Minister confirm that Professor Chapman's analysis will mean that Australian students will pay $100,000 for degrees?

Mrs Bronwyn Bishop (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I call the honourable Minister for Education and Training.

Christopher Pyne (Sturt, Liberal Party, Leader of the House) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I relish the opportunity to answer this question from the member, because of course he is entirely wrong about his analysis, and it gives me the opportunity to explode the myth that Labor has tried to create about so-called $100,000 degrees. There are three universities that have announced their fees under the government's reform. The Australian Catholic University have indicated that they will not increase their fees by $1, and that was before the government split the 20 per cent Commonwealth Grants Scheme reduction away from the deregulation. They had already indicated that there would be no increase in fees whatsoever. For both the University of Western Australia and the Queensland University of Technology—who both indicated what their fees will be—the fees are less than half those in the scare campaign promulgated by the Labor Party.

But if you need any evidence at all to know how Labor's scare campaign has failed, the facts are that this year enrolments of students at university are up. They have gone up. Every year since the Higher Education Contribution Scheme was introduced, averaged over this period since 1988, enrolments have exponentially increased. So, in fact, because of the Higher Education Contribution Scheme, more students have gone to university because universities could afford to enrol them. Under the Labor Party's elitist model of so-called free education, because of a lack of revenue going to universities, fewer students had the opportunity to go to university. Since 1988 the number of students accessing higher education has risen and risen and risen to the point where now there are almost 800,000 full-time undergraduates at university.

That is transformative for those people who have had that opportunity, and Labor wants to put the caps back on. Labor wants to shut the door for low-SES students getting into university. It is this side of the House that wants to expand the demand-driven system to the pathways programs that low-SES students and first-generation university goers use to get the opportunity to go to university. So, I am fixing Labor's problem. I am fixing Labor's failures, because I am a fixer. When we came to power 18 months ago we found $6.6 billion of cuts, and we are transforming the higher education system. But don't take my word for it. Gareth Evans, John Dawkins, Bruce Chapman, Peter Dawkins, Craig Emerson and Peter Beattie are all supporting this government's reforms.

Opposition Members:

Opposition members interjecting—

Mrs Bronwyn Bishop (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Before any further questions are asked, there is again that wall of noise starting to erupt, which will not be tolerated—and that includes the member for Melbourne Ports.