Bills Digest No. 187 2004–05
Higher Education Support Amendment (Abolition of
Compulsory Up-front Student Union Fees) Bill
2005
WARNING:
This Digest was prepared for debate. It reflects the legislation as
introduced and does not canvass subsequent amendments. This Digest
does not have any official legal status. Other sources should be
consulted to determine the subsequent official status of the
Bill.
CONTENTS
Passage History
Purpose
Background
Main Provisions
Endnotes
Contact Officer & Copyright Details
Passage History
Higher
Education Support Amendment (Abolition of Compulsory Up-front
Student Union Fees) Bill 2005
Date Introduced: 16 March 2005
House: House of Representatives
Portfolio: Education, Science and
Training
Commencement: 1
January 2006
The Bill will amend the Higher Education Support Act
2003 to prevent higher education providers from requiring their
students to become members of student organisations or to require
them to pay fees for services and amenities that are not of an
academic nature.
More detailed background on this issue can be found in the
Parliamentary Library Background Notes at http://libiis1/Library_Services/BN/Education/sp006.doc.
(1)
This Bill is the third attempt by the Howard Government to
prohibit compulsory student unionism. The first was the Higher
Education Legislation Amendment Bill 1999, which was subject to a
report by the Senate Employment, Workplace Relations, Small
Business and Education Legislation Committee and did not progress
through the Senate. Then, in September 2003, the Government
introduced the Higher Education Support Amendment (Abolition of
Compulsory Up-front Student Union Fees) Bill 2003 as part of its
higher education reform package, Backing
Australia s Future. The Bill did not proceed
beyond the second reading.
On 16 March 2005 the Minister for Education, Science and
Training, the Hon Dr Brendan Nelson MP, issued a Media Release
which set out the compulsory amenities and services fees payable at
each university, together with an estimate of the total revenue
generated some $162 million in 2005 (this did not include the fees
paid by part-time and postgraduate students).(2) A rough
estimate of the total revenue from these fees could be in the order
of $200-250 million.(3) To place this sum in context, in
2003 these same institutions had total higher education revenues of
$11874 million. Of this, $4899 million was Commonwealth funding,
$2096 million was from HECS and related schemes, and $2613 million
from higher education fees and charges.
The Australian Vice-Chancellors Committee policy on student
organisations strongly supports the view that fees charged for the
provision of services for students are an obligation of enrolment,
whether they are provided by student organisations or in other ways
by the University .(4) The policy notes that these fees
provide for provision of food outlets, buildings, meeting rooms,
toilets, stationery and second-hand book services, child care,
legal services, health and employment services, assistance with
accommodation and welfare services. The AVCC s chief executive,
John Mullarvey, has stated that these services will no longer be
provided by universities unless students pay for them
voluntarily.
The AVCC policy does provide for exemptions to the requirement
to be a member of a student organisation, but considers that such
exempted students should still be required to pay an amenities and
services fee.
It has been argued that the prohibition of compulsory amenities
and services charges will have a disproportionate impact upon
regional campuses. ACUMA (the Australian Campus Union Managers
Association) have surveyed eleven institutions with regional
campuses. They claim that most services and facilities would be
closed, with those that remained being operated on a commercial
basis. They anticipate around 550 job losses. ACUMA has also noted
that a number of campuses operate community facilities that could
be in danger of closing if funding is stopped. Examples given are
the Toowoomba sport and recreation facilities operated by the
University of Southern Queensland and the RMIT University facility
at Bundoora.(5)
Proponents of the prohibition of compulsory amenities fees argue
that no-one should be forced to pay for services that they do not
wish to use and that universities, because they now operate in a
competitive commercial environment, will themselves fund those
amenities and services that they believe are necessary to attract
students. However, it might be argued that universities with
regional campuses are not as well placed as the major metropolitan
institutions to finance such activities. For example, the
Government s higher education policy statement Backing
Australia s Future, noted that:
Universities that provide places at regional campuses face
higher costs as a result of location, size and history. Regional
campuses generally have less potential to diversify revenue
sources, a smaller capacity to compete for fee-paying students and
a narrower industrial base providing fewer opportunities for
commercial partnerships.(6)
In recognition of these factors, the new Commonwealth Grants
Scheme incorporates a regional loading that will provide $146
million over five years.(7) There may be a case for
revising the loading to further assist some regional campuses to
maintain services that are unavailable commercially because of the
location and size of the campus. It should be noted that even with
the regional loading, higher education resources (and their
associated economic benefits) are directed disproportionately
towards the capital cities.(8)
Item 1 of Schedule 1 inserts a new section 19-37 which provides
that a higher education provider must not require their students to
become members of student organisations or to pay fees for services
and amenities that are not of an academic nature. Sub-section 19-37
(3) provides for the following exceptions to the prohibition on
non-academic fees:
-
fees for goods or services that are essential to the course of
study in which the student is enrolled, so long as the student had
the choice of acquiring them from suppliers other than the higher
education provider;
-
fees for goods that either become the property of the student
and that are not intended to be consumed during the course of
study; or food, transport and accommodation associated with field
trips.
Item 3 of Schedule 1 inserts a new section 33-37 which provides
that the basic grant payable to a higher education provider can be
reduced if it breaches the conditions imposed by section 19-37. The
reduction is equivalent to $100 for every Commonwealth supported
place allocated to the provider.
-
This link is for internal Parliamentary users only. However,
some of this background material is also available in the Bills
Digest at:
http://www.aph.gov.au/library/pubs/bd/2003-04/04bd058.htm
-
Dr Nelson s Media Release can be obtained from,
http://www.dest.gov.au/Ministers/Media/Nelson/2005/03/n1062150305.asp
-
The $250 million figure was obtained by assuming that all
full-time students pay the average fee indicated by the Nelson
table ($328.35 per student), and that part-time students pay half
this amount.
-
The AVCC Policy on student organisations can be obtained
from,
http://www.avcc.edu.au/content.asp?page=/policies_programs/student_organisations/index.htm
.
-
Public Submission by ACUMA, January 2005.
-
Our Universities Backing Australia s Future, p.14.
-
The loading pays an increment for student load in regional
campuses according to the distance from the closest mainland
capital city and the size of the campus. It varies from 1.5 per
cent (Wollongong) to 30 per cent (Northern Territory). Details of
the loading are set out in Chapter Four of the Commonwealth Grant
Scheme Guidelines see:
http://www.backingaustraliasfuture.gov.au/guidelines/cgs_guide.htm
-
Estimated higher education operating expenditure per resident
population in regional areas was around half that of the capital
cities in 1997. It would then have required additional expenditure
of around $2 billion p.a. to bring regional per capita expenditure
up to metropolitan levels. See the Parliamentary Library Research
Note, Higher
Education in Regional Australia (Number 21, 1999-2000).
There have been no major shifts in funding patterns to
fundamentally alter this situation since then.
Kim Jackson
22 June 2005
Bills Digest Service
Information and Research Services
This paper has been prepared to support the work of the
Australian Parliament using information available at the time of
production. The views expressed do not reflect an official position
of the Information and Research Service, nor do they constitute
professional legal opinion.
IRS staff are available to discuss the paper's
contents with Senators and Members and their staff but not with
members of the public.
ISSN 1328-8091
© Commonwealth of Australia 2005
Except to the extent of the uses permitted under the
Copyright Act 1968, no part of this publication may be
reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, including
information storage and retrieval systems, without the prior
written consent of the Parliamentary Library, other than by members
of the Australian Parliament in the course of their official
duties.
Published by the Parliamentary Library, 2005.
Back to top