Sarah Hanson-Young (SA, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I move Greens amendment (4) that was circulated in the chamber yesterday:

(4)    Schedule 1, item 5, page 5 (after line 28), at the end of section 19-38, add:

Report on consultations

        (9)    Each higher education provider must, as soon as practicable after 31 December each year, prepare and publish a report detailing the consultation which occurred during that year between the provider, its students and its student organisations in relation to the level of the fee, collection of the fee and expenditure of amounts paid.

      (10)    Each higher education provider must provide to the department a copy of each report prepared under subsection (9).

      (11)    The department must publish on its website a copy of each report received under subsection (10) in a form which allows ready comparison between the reports of different higher education providers.

This amendment seeks, as the previous one did, to ensure that we have accountability in how the money is being spent and that the $250 that will be collected from each student, if this legislation were to pass, is accounted for and spent in consultation with student organisations, student representatives and students. This will ensure that there is some element of transparency and accountability by requiring universities to show how they have involved students in deciding how the universities will spend their money.

We know that already the government’s legislation does not give the money that students are handing over directly to their student organisations. We know that the universities will have the discretion to spend the money on the services that they see fit but we believe that there needs to be a built-in mechanism which allows universities to discuss and decide collectively with their student populous how this money is spent. This amendment goes to the issue of compliance—and ensuring that universities comply and show that they comply. We need to make sure we have transparency and accountability.

I spoke last night about how I was surprised that the coalition did not support my previous amendment, which called for building a solid accountability measure within this legislation. This is the next step: to ensure that universities are required to speak with their students about how they are going to spend their students’ money. $250 is a lot of money if you are a university student. It is a lot of money if you are not. We need to ensure that students have an element of say in how this money is going to be spent and this amendment ensures that universities have to report on how they have included students in decisions about how their money is spent.

It is not good enough just to leave it to good will and assume that it will happen. We need to ensure we have accountability and transparency just as there is in the approach that the government is taking on a variety of other different educational transformations and policy directions of late—whether we are talking about schools or other elements of the Higher Education Support Act. This amendment is building in an accountability and transparency mechanism to ensure that universities show how they have involved students and consulted with students before they go and spend their money and throughout the process.

Brett Mason (Queensland, Liberal Party, Shadow Parliamentary Secretary for Education) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Can I again thank Senator Hanson-Young for her amendment. I think it is sensible and she should be congratulated for putting forward accountability mechanisms in any legislation. Senator, perhaps in future we might better coordinate our efforts. While I do not see any serious objections to this amendment, it does not overcome the serious deficiencies that opposition senators have outlined so the opposition will be opposing this amendment.

Kim Carr (Victoria, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Innovation, Industry, Science and Research) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The government is providing the Greens senators with a letter similar to that that has been provided to Senator Xenophon outlining the measures that will be covered in the guidelines in terms of the accountability mechanisms. I understand that is on its way and I trust it will satisfy the requests that have been made of the government in regard to assurances on the accountability mechanisms. As a consequence, in the view of the government this amendment is not necessary, and we will not be supporting it.

Question negatived.

The Temporary Chairman:

The question now is that the bill, as amended, be agreed to.

Brett Mason (Queensland, Liberal Party, Shadow Parliamentary Secretary for Education) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I have several questions for the minister. Can I first of all thank you, Minister, and in particular Ms Ellis, Minister for Early Childhood Education, Childcare and Youth and Minister for Sport, for her letter to Senator Xenophon. That does address many of the issues I was going to raise, so I want to thank the government for that. I appreciate getting a copy of that letter, but I have some other questions.

With respect to the student services and amenities fee guidelines, part (m) talks about student media. I wanted to know whether it is prohibited by the guidelines for a student newspaper to endorse a political candidate or a political party within the student media.

Kim Carr (Victoria, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Innovation, Industry, Science and Research) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator, it is not the government’s intention to censor newspapers.

Brett Mason (Queensland, Liberal Party, Shadow Parliamentary Secretary for Education) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

So in fact student money that has been compulsorily acquired from other students can be used for political purposes?

Kim Carr (Victoria, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Innovation, Industry, Science and Research) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator, given the extraordinarily narrow view of politics that has been expressed by coalition senators, I would have thought that you would regard just about any matter as non-political; therefore, it could be said that there is no question that student newspapers would cover political questions in that manner. The fact remains that students are entitled to publish newspapers and they are entitled to express views; it is, in fact, an important part of the education process to debate matters. I really think whether you regard them as politically acceptable or not is a question for your party to resolve amongst yourselves. As far as the government is concerned, we are not in the business of censoring student newspapers when it comes to the expression of student opinions which are expressed lawfully and which obviously meet the normal requirements that one would expect in terms of publishing.

Brett Mason (Queensland, Liberal Party, Shadow Parliamentary Secretary for Education) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Minister, thank you for that, but perhaps I did not make myself clear. I was not talking about political causes. Both the legislation and the guidelines themselves explicitly prohibit student money being used for a political candidate or a political party. Let us forget political causes for a second. The explicit prohibitions in the act and the guidelines are for political candidates or political parties. Is it prohibited under the guidelines for student newspapers, funded by compulsory levies on students, to explicitly endorse a political candidate or a political party?

Kim Carr (Victoria, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Innovation, Industry, Science and Research) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Clause 19-38 of the act, sorry, of the bill—I trust it will be an act, but we may be about to discover that that is a forlorn hope—says:

(1) A higher education provider must not spend an amount paid to the provider as a *student services and amenities fee to support:

(a) a political party; or

(b) the election of a person as a member of:

(i) the legislature of the Commonwealth, a State or a Territory; or

(ii) a local government body.

Brett Mason (Queensland, Liberal Party, Shadow Parliamentary Secretary for Education) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I take it from that that in fact student newspapers cannot be used to specifically endorse a political candidate or a political party. I am not talking about political causes here; I am talking about political parties or political candidates explicitly. That is the position, then, Minister?

Kim Carr (Victoria, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Innovation, Industry, Science and Research) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator, I must say to you I find it hard to believe that you would expect the parliament of the Commonwealth of Australia to pass legislation prohibiting the expression of opinions in student newspapers. I find it an amazing proposition. That is what you have just asked me, and I am saying to you, Senator: that is not the purpose of this parliament. Surely it is not the purpose of this parliament to ban people expressing their opinions.

Brett Mason (Queensland, Liberal Party, Shadow Parliamentary Secretary for Education) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I take it from that, Minister, if that is your answer, that money compulsorily acquired from students and used by student newspapers can in fact be used to endorse a political party or a political candidate—yes or no, Minister, please.

Kim Carr (Victoria, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Innovation, Industry, Science and Research) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The world is a bit more complicated a place than Senator Mason obviously appears to acknowledge. All I can do is draw his attention to 19-38. I have read out clause (1); let me go to clause (2):

(2)

If a higher education provider pays a person or organisation an amount paid to the provider as a *student services and amenities fee, the provider must make the payment on the condition that none of the payment is to be spent by the person or organisation to support:

(a)

a political party; or

(b)

the election of a person as a member of:

(i)

the legislature of the Commonwealth, a State or a Territory; or

(ii)

a local government body.

And so it goes on. Now that is a different question to whether or not people write letters to the editor for Farrago.

Brett Mason (Queensland, Liberal Party, Shadow Parliamentary Secretary for Education) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I know I am not a very good lawyer, Minister, but I still cannot follow your answer. But perhaps for the sake of my and the Senate’s sanity I might ask a different question. Let us say that money is given to a student guild from a university to run a coffee shop. If the coffee shop makes money can the student union use those profits in any way they want? In other words are the profits of that coffee shop subject to the bill and the guidelines?

Kim Carr (Victoria, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Innovation, Industry, Science and Research) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Mason, it is my expectation that the private income of entities that function on university campuses, be they businesses or individuals for that matter, would not be the subject of this legislation. It is not our intention to ban people who are members of the Labor Party, the Liberal Party or any other party from buying a cup of coffee at a university, nor in any way seek to undermine a legitimate process for a business or an individual to function at a university. The proposition that you are putting to me, as I understand it, is that, if there are receipts from a legitimate business, we are to regulate those receipts and the purpose for which those receipts are to be spent. I think that is far beyond any possible interpretation of this bill.

Brett Mason (Queensland, Liberal Party, Shadow Parliamentary Secretary for Education) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Thank you for that, and I take that to mean that, if a coffee shop that has been provided with funds compulsorily acquired from students makes a profit of $20,000 in a year, that $20,000 can be used for any purposes, whether they are political purposes, political candidates or whatever. That is what I understand your answer to mean, and is that correct?

Kim Carr (Victoria, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Innovation, Industry, Science and Research) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator, I cannot add anything to what I have already put to you. It is a nonsensical proposition that you are now seeking for the Commonwealth parliament to control the legitimate incomes of businesses or individuals at universities. Senator, I would not have thought that the taxation act distinguished between students and other citizens in this country in terms of income in that way. Why should this particular legislation do the same, or do as I think you are suggesting?

Sarah Hanson-Young (SA, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I would like to speak on a separate matter. I have a letter from the Minister for Early Childhood Education, Childcare and Youth, Kate Ellis, in relation to the arrangements and agreements that we have been able to come to, and I seek leave to table that document.

Leave granted.

I indicate that, based on these arrangements and some amendments to the guidelines, the Greens would be happy to support the legislation. The minister and the government have taken on board the issues in relation to the need for compliance, accountability and transparency. While we would have liked to have seen something specific, the minister has outlined that there will be the need for higher education providers to sign-off on a compliance certificate at the end of each financial year, outlining exactly where student money has been spent and providing a balance sheet. This will ensure that students can see where their money is being spent and then advocate whether they have any concerns about that to their institution.

We were obviously very concerned that higher education providers would simply decide where and when they believed advocacy and representation was important, and that they could pick and choose certain groups. We were very concerned that there was no explicit mention of the three broad groups of students who all have various different needs, that there was a need to ensure that any welfare and support services covered them and that this money gets spent in ways that support them. They are, of course, undergraduate, postgraduate and international students. The minister has taken those issues on board and has amended the guidelines to reflect that, including ensuring that we have the election of student representatives from those three separate groups, which is very, very important to ensure that international students and postgraduate students have elected representative voices, as do undergraduate students. It was very important for us to ensure that none of these groups, who are all going to be paying the money, were left out. They have different needs and we need to ensure that they have the opportunity to voice their concerns and advocate for their different needs and issues. I thank the minister and the government, and I hope that that letter has now been circulated.

Brett Mason (Queensland, Liberal Party, Shadow Parliamentary Secretary for Education) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I thank Senator Hanson-Young for her contribution because accountability in this context is important and I would like to thank the government for providing the note from Ms Ellis, Minister for Early Childhood Education, Childcare and Youth. In the second paragraph it says that section 22-15 of the act empowers the minister to revoke a body’s approval as a higher education provider. If the minister is satisfied that the body has breached a quality and accountability requirement then it is appropriate to revoke the approval. I thank the government for providing that. That accountability goes from the minister to the university and that is the relationship that is being discussed there. Minister, my concern is: has the government any proposals about overseeing the relationship between the university and the student? By that I mean: is the government going to set any guidelines or templates for an appeals process for students who are concerned about higher education providers not doing the right thing with their compulsorily acquired money?

Kim Carr (Victoria, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Innovation, Industry, Science and Research) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Mason, the arrangements as outlined by the government are essentially a relationship between the Commonwealth and the university as an institution. The university is required to certify that it has met its obligations under legislation enacted which authorises the payment of moneys. Those principles apply whether it is in a research area, a teaching area or any other areas in which the grants are made by the Commonwealth to the university as an institution.

The regulation of individual student behaviour is a matter for the university—they have to sign off that there has been compliance. It is not the Commonwealth’s role to establish the behaviour of individual students. Nearly a million people are enrolled in universities in any given year across the country, and that has been increasing for some time. The Commonwealth does not seek and has never sought, in my long involvement in this industry, to identify a personal relationship with each of those students other than through the HECS arrangements that are made and any other contractual arrangements between the Commonwealth and those students, through the taxation system. It would be inappropriate for that pattern to be changed in this legislation. The relationship is between the Commonwealth and the institution.

Brett Mason (Queensland, Liberal Party, Shadow Parliamentary Secretary for Education) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Thanks, Minister. If the Commonwealth, then, is not mandating any process for student engagement with universities, how can we be certain that students will be looked after and that there will be some appeals process, such that they can be assured their concerns about the expenditure of their money will be looked after?

Kim Carr (Victoria, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Innovation, Industry, Science and Research) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator, I am sure you are aware that the constitutional relationship between the Commonwealth and universities is a quite complex matter. They are technically state institutions, they are regulated by state parliaments, but the expenditure of Commonwealth money is covered by measures that are regulated by Commonwealth legislation. The Commonwealth does not seek to establish a relationship between the university and individual students other than for those purposes for which the Commonwealth has appropriated money. That is effectively the basis upon which that discussion is held. The Commonwealth is now moving, through the reform measures, to broaden the level of engagement with the university system, consistent with the fact that these are state institutions enacted by state legislature. We have no intention to change that particular matter.

The fact remains that, with regard to all of those verification processes, the arrangement is between the Commonwealth and the institution—the vice-chancellor or whoever it happens to be. The authorised officer signs off, verifies, that Commonwealth moneys that have been expended in that university are in accordance with the arrangements made with the Commonwealth. If there are students who have complaints about the expenditure—for instance, regarding my area, people have written to me about the award of an Australian postgraduate award, as to whether they have been properly treated—that is effectively a matter for the university. The relationship is with the university in terms of the actual administrative arrangements for those awards. If there are broader complaints, and we are looking at these issues, in terms of accreditation arrangements—this is part of the Bradley reforms that have been proposed; in my case there are questions that we are exploring with the universities about research misconduct—a series of measures are changing that relationship, but those relationships are governed by the legislative framework passed by the parliament to this point.

Brett Mason (Queensland, Liberal Party, Shadow Parliamentary Secretary for Education) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Minister, again I thank you for your answer. In a sense you have outlined the problem. If the relationship is between the Commonwealth government and the universities, and if a university is doing the wrong thing—spending money inappropriately, giving it to political causes—what does the student do? What process does he or she undertake if no processes have been designed by their particular university? What do they do? Write to the minister?

Kim Carr (Victoria, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Innovation, Industry, Science and Research) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Invariably they will. Even some members of the Liberal Party might do that. May I even be so bold as to suggest they might engage in a political process to complain about what is happening with the expenditure of public money. I know that is a shocking revelation to you.

Brett Mason (Queensland, Liberal Party, Shadow Parliamentary Secretary for Education) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Not with someone else’s money.

Kim Carr (Victoria, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Innovation, Industry, Science and Research) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I have heard that members of the Liberal Party do engage in a political process at universities. I have heard that has been going on for some time. So maybe you should go back to the Liberal Party branches that are obviously giving you such difficulty on this issue and draw their attention to the way things actually work at universities. We are seeking to provide a framework to support student services, amenities, representation and advocacy for students at universities. That is essentially what this bill seeks to do. I know you have a view that we as a parliament should regulate the behaviour of students at universities. While in government, you sought to establish a series of protocols about the behaviours of university administrators and university academics—

Brett Mason (Queensland, Liberal Party, Shadow Parliamentary Secretary for Education) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

You supported it for a time.

Kim Carr (Victoria, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Innovation, Industry, Science and Research) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

No, no. Previous ministers sought to engage in direct interventions with regard to which research projects were undertaken, the behaviour undertaken by students and what universities spent their money on. You did this under the guise of Work Choices; you did this under the guise of a number of other moral crusades that you sought to perpetuate and for your narrow, base political motives. We are not going to be a party to it. We are about ensuring that institutions are able to be run properly and that we understand the importance of universities. As Minister Gillard pointed out, we take the foot off the throats of universities. What you are seeking to do is to reimpose that Commonwealth boot onto the throats of universities.

Brett Mason (Queensland, Liberal Party, Shadow Parliamentary Secretary for Education) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Minister, what I am trying to do is ensure that a student who is aggrieved, who has had their money compulsorily acquired, has some process by which they can ensure universities do the right thing. Your response here this afternoon is that no student can be certain that that is going to happen, and that is a great disappointment and a failing of the bill.

Moving on to another question, let us assume, Minister, that student money is given to the Wilderness Society. It could happen in one of three ways: either directly from the university, from the student guild or it could come via a student club funded by the guild or university. Would this be prohibited by the guidelines?

Kim Carr (Victoria, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Innovation, Industry, Science and Research) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The Student services and amenities fee guidelines have been tabled in this chamber. They outline the purposes for which Commonwealth monies can be spent and they list a series of matters that go to such things as food and beverages; sports and recreation; clubs and societies; child care; legal services; health care; housing; employment; financial services; visual arts, performing arts and audiovisual media; debating—I can see why that would upset you!; libraries and reading rooms; student media—this is revolutionary stuff!; student study skills and advocacy; personal accident insurance; orientation information; and support services for overseas students. Nowhere there does it say anything about the Wilderness Society.

Brett Mason (Queensland, Liberal Party, Shadow Parliamentary Secretary for Education) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I concede, Minister, that I am not a very good lawyer, but above that list a) through to q), Minister, you will notice if you read it that it says:

Allowable uses of the fee in relation to services and amenities may include the categories listed below. In all cases the purpose would include but not be limited to,—

in other words, that list is not exhaustive—

the direct provision of the service or amenity, the provision of infrastructure (including new construction) and subsidies that would reduce the price that students may have to pay.

That list is not exhaustive. Even a poor lawyer like me will understand that in fact it is simply reflective rather than exhaustive.

Kim Carr (Victoria, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Innovation, Industry, Science and Research) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Mason, you are obviously very concerned about people dressing up as koala bears! I just say to you that any additional matters to be added to this list—

Brett Mason (Queensland, Liberal Party, Shadow Parliamentary Secretary for Education) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

You make a better koala bear—

Kim Carr (Victoria, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Innovation, Industry, Science and Research) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I am getting better at it. Any other matters to be added to this list, of course, would be a disallowable instrument. I have got no doubt that we would hear a great deal more from you on the issue of people wishing to participate in environmental groups.

Bill, as amended, agreed to.

Bill reported with an amendment; report adopted.