Christopher Back (WA, Liberal Party) Share this | Hansard source

I am delighted to stand to support the Social Services Legislation Amendment (Simplifying Student Payments) Bill 2017, to associate myself with the comments of my colleague Senator McKenzie, to recognise those she has named in being instrumental over time—backbenchers and ministers—and also to acknowledge the work that she has done in her capacity as chair of the committee.

You know, this really shows that persistence lasts. I think I came into this place in early 2009, and it was one of the first issues with my background, coming from a rural and regional area in Western Australia and having been involved in rural and regional primary, secondary and, particularly, tertiary education. It was seen as an area of such difficulty and one that so urgently needed addressing. It is fantastic to be here today to actually see the support across the chamber. I acknowledge the comments of Senator Polley—particularly her introductory comments—with regard to the bill, though there are a couple of points I may take issue with toward the conclusion of Senator Polley's contribution.

It has long been the case that students from rural, regional and remote Australia have been significantly disadvantaged in comparison to students from the capitals and major regional cities. Acting Deputy President Marshall, you were, as I recall, a member of a Senate committee which I chaired back in 2012 that looked at teaching, learning, why students were not learning and why teachers could not teach. It was in that report that we identified, of course, rural and regional students as one more of the disadvantaged groups of children in our society: those of Indigenous background, those with disabilities and those from low-socioeconomic backgrounds. We identified in that report very strongly that students from rural, regional and remote Australia needed to be included in the key pillars of groups who were disadvantaged.

Coming from WA, I pick up the difference in the academic standards of, for example, young people who may have been from the beginning of their school through to year 6 in regional, rural and remote areas. The cohort splits. One group stays in a rural community. The others go on, for example, to city schools—very often boarding schools. By year 12 you see a remarkable difference in the education outcomes of those students. In comparison with their peers in city based schools, you do not see a difference in the academic outcomes of those year 12 students whether they come from city urban or rural and remote areas. But, when you speak to examiners, invigilators and others, they will tell you immediately that those who have come from rural, remote or regional schools have lower education standards and outcomes. And it is the case in this country. There is no reason why there should be a disadvantage based on that element.

Senator McKenzie has outlined the difference in cost for a student to attend, for example, a city university or a TAFE or higher skills development location. It is not just the cost in dollar terms—as we know, those of us who had to go away from our homes for tertiary education. It is not just the dollar cost. It is the emotional cost. It is the support base that is needed. It is the fact that a 17- or 18-year-old does not have their own home to come back to at the end of the day. They are either in private rental accommodation or in a university college, or similar, if their parents can afford it. We know—and I know from my own personal experience—the added cost, but at least, if we can address the financial cost, that will go a long way.

It was in June of last year that I recall putting out a release congratulating the coalition and stating that, should we be successful in government, we would implement many of the strategies that we see in place today. It is most important that people understand that the reduction from 18 months to 14 months for a student to a prove independence after leaving school is of critical importance. By the time you take the month of December in the year they leave school, and the month of January, 13 months later, you get the gap year and the two added months. In other words, the net loss to a student in leaving school but not going immediately to university is only one year—one gap year, during which time they should work.

Those of us particularly associated with education in the agricultural space would be interested in Senator Siewert's comments as an agricultural scientist. If people who leave school have one year away before they start university, a higher proportion of them actually go on to uni. For those who must wait a two-year period, which is effectively what 18 months causes, the dropout rate, or the non-attendance rate, is vastly greater, and that is something we cannot afford.

I say—through you, Acting Deputy President Marshall—to the young people in the student gallery who are watching now: whatever you do, should the opportunity present, keep to the minimum the time interval between your leaving school and when you start your further studies. Because of the distraction after, certainly, one year away, the likelihood of you returning to university or other higher education studies two years later is reduced significantly. I say to those who might be interested in this process: it is so important that students do get on and start their program. If they have a gap year they work during that gap year, then they obviously have the financial independence, wherewithal and that added year of maturity. I agree with all those things. What I have great difficulty with is the loss of those two years, which this bill addresses. We will not see that loss of two years.

The other point that must always be borne in mind is the whole question of student aspiration. Through you, Acting Deputy President, I appeal to the young people in the gallery watching this discussion. We are talking about STEM—science, technology, engineering, mathematics. Of itself, STEM is only a stepping stone to a phenomenal future for the young people of Australia, who must not see STEM as just the endpoint. It is the familiarity with the knowledge of science, technology, engineering and mathematics that will see you young people embrace the phenomenal spectrum that is ahead of you: 3D printing and everything that goes with 3D printing; the advances we are seeing already in modern medicine; the announcements of the government of more than $100 billion in new naval shipbuilding, which is going to require skills across the board—at the certificate level, the diploma level, the degree level, the post-degree level—that will see you all not only achieve your ambitions and get yourselves into good, long-term, high-paying jobs, but, ultimately, your own children too. You will be so employable around the world, because everything we are talking about now is international. It is not confined to Australia. We are not doing these things purely for employment and opportunity in Australia. We are doing them for our role in the world.

Again, I say that the initiatives that have been taken in these changes we see today—simplifying student payments—will allow rural and regional students to also participate in those opportunities this country is on the cusp of. Just one example is the result of the work of Professor Fiona Woods after the horrific Bali bombing. In Perth, Fiona Woods with her team were able to develop technology where they could take the skin of people in a laboratory environment and create a spray of that skin which could then be sprayed back on to the horrific burns of burn victims. Just imagine this in five years time, with the advances we are making in science and technology: if a person needs a kidney transplant, they will take the tissue of the good kidney, produce it in the laboratory, and with 3D printing they will be able to put back into that patient a new kidney that is that person's own kidney. They will not have to worry about needing a donor. They will have their own kidney.

I say—through you, Acting Deputy President—to the groups in three areas in this chamber: it is you who will be the people making those advances. If you take nothing else away from your time in Canberra and Parliament House, take away the excitement of the opportunities that exist for you.

I know there are others wanting to speak. I know it is not the time to be talking about penalty rates today, and I will not take issue with it except to Senator Polley—through you, Acting Deputy President—if I can make two observations. The first is that on the weekend I spoke to a person in Perth who owns clothing stores in outer metropolitan areas, not in the CBD, and this person said to me, 'With these changes, I will open those stores on a Sunday, when I cannot afford to open them now.' So that is one observation I would make.

The other one goes back to 2009. I think it was the first committee that I sat on. I cannot remember whether Senator Polley was a member. I do remember Senator Bilyk being there. I just ask you to reflect on this: up till then, before the changes that were introduced by the then Labor government, pharmacy students could on a weekend be involved in the preparing of Webster packs and blister packs for patients in nursing homes, hospitals et cetera. Not only did they have the opportunity to be employed on a weekend, to earn some extra income on a weekend, but of course there was the value to them as pharmacy students of working with pharmaceuticals, of learning about them and of discussing the relativities of what was compatible with that medication. That was completely lost, simply because the necessity to pay those penalty rates was such that the employers were saying, 'Well, we can have this work done from Monday to Friday by unskilled or semiskilled people, but unfortunately we can't employ those pharmacy students on a weekend, particularly a Sunday, because of the penalty rates.' Today is not the day to be talking about those matters, but, since it was raised, I have just made two very simple observations.

In conclusion, I am delighted to see the work that has been done by the backbench, that has been done by committees and that has been undertaken by the ministers that sees us today able to agree to the amendments in the Social Services Legislation Amendment (Simplifying Student Payments) Bill 2017 and to recognise again that the barrier to education for rural and regional students will be in some way broken down. The best evidence of that barrier is that, whilst people from rural and regional Australia represent a quarter of the general community, less than 20 per cent are represented at Australia's universities. From our own state of Western Australia, that figure would be much lower. I thank the chamber for the opportunity.