The Higher Education Support (Charges) Bill 2018 and the Higher Education Support Amendment (Cost Recovery) Bill 2018 impose a levy on the higher education sector already under pressure from funding cuts.
The bills have been introduced with insufficient consultation and without consideration of their impacts on higher education providers and students.
We continue to disagree with the decisions to hold no hearings for this inquiry and conduct the inquiry in a short period of time. Both decisions limited scrutiny of these bills. The Australian Greens thank all of the submitters to the inquiry, and acknowledge their efforts given the short submission period.
The Australian Greens are deeply concerned about the ongoing cuts to the higher education sector. The two proposed bills represent a worrying continuation in this Government’s larger pattern of defunding the higher education sector and shifting the costs of providing higher education away from the Commonwealth.
The proposed charges must be considered in the context of recent cuts to higher education funding. The Australian Greens note that in December 2017, the current Liberal-National Government effectively slashed $2.2 billion from the higher education sector by freezing Commonwealth funding for teaching and learning.
Despite the evidence provided and concerns raised by the majority of stakeholders, the Majority Report supported by the Government dominated committee has recommended that the bills be passed. The Australian Greens disagree with this recommendation.
Shifting the cost of higher education away from the Commonwealth
The bills propose shifting the cost of administering HELP loans to higher education providers, with yet another levy on higher education providers, who are already struggling under massive cuts to their budget by this Government. This is part of an ongoing pattern of the Commonwealth shirking its responsibility to fund the delivery and administration of higher education.
Universities Australia stated in its submission: “higher education providers should not have to pay the bureaucracy to perform administrative functions that are integral to the HELP scheme and for which DET is already funded…” The University of Melbourne stated: “the principle of asking universities to meet the costs of Government administration is an unfortunate precedent and one which should be, at the very least, interrogated…”
Concerns about the proposed costs being passed on to individual students were also expressed by stakeholders. The Council of Australian Postgraduate Associations stated in its submission: “inevitably, cuts impact the delivery of teaching and research, the core functions of universities in Australia. Funding cuts will be passed onto undergraduate and postgraduate students, whether they are built into tuition costs for full fee-paying students, result in increased student to academic staff ratios, or lead higher education providers to otherwise reduce the ‘cost of delivery’ of education.”
The University of Newcastle stated in its submission: “the costs of administering HELP are already shared by the university sector and government—the University of Newcastle, like other universities, provides a range of administrative and student services in order to ensure it properly administers HELP funding.”
In the Australian Greens’ view, shifting costs of administering student loans to higher education providers is not only wrong in principle, it also overburdens an already underfunded sector. Several submissions highlighted that these charges will mean higher education providers will be forced to divert resources away from teaching and learning, essential activities such as supporting equity outcomes, and overall provision of a quality education to students.
Innovative Research Universities also highlighted in its submission that the proposal is an indirect charge on students, stating that the charges will “penalise students by further reducing the resources universities and other higher education providers have to deliver students a good education.”
Charges unclear and outside legislation
The Australian Greens are concerned that the proposed charges are not explicit and will sit wholly outside legislation, including the methodology to calculate these charges. This prevents appropriate parliamentary scrutiny of the proposed charges. The amount and calculation of the annual charge will be wholly determined by regulation which has not yet been drafted.
The University of Newcastle expressed this concern in its submission, saying “as the amount charged is set in regulation rather than legislation, we are concerned that it could, at least theoretically, change significantly without consultation or in-depth Parliamentary consideration.”
In addition, there have been several different figures provided by the Government which have contributed to the confusion. The University of Melbourne stated: “there is significant uncertainty relating to key aspects of the changes proposed in the bills. The Financial Impact Statements contained in the bills indicate that the Government expects to save $13.8 million over the forward estimates. This figure is significantly lower than the estimated savings of $30.7 million over three years that were included in the 2018 Budget statements when the policy change was announced. There is a need for clarity on the financial impact of the bills, so that the Senate can make an informed assessment.”
Short consultation period and no consultation prior to the bills
The Australian Greens are deeply concerned, along with many stakeholders who made submissions to the inquiry, about the short consultation period for the inquiry into these bills. The committee also resolved to not hold any public hearings and provided a short submission period. This further indicates the Government was not and is not genuine about consultation. It was only late on 31 October 2018, two days before submissions to this inquiry closed, that the Department released a Cost Recovery Implementation Statement (CRIS) to inform consultations. This is bad practice and sends a clear signal to stakeholders that this Government is not genuine about consultation.
The Group of Eight stated in its submission on the lack of consultation: “…the higher education sector has been promised consultation re this unacceptable cost recovery model. Consultation has not occurred—even as required by the Australian Government Cost Recovery Guidelines. This is untenable given 1 January is less than two months’ away.”
Universities Australia also signalled its disappointment at the “limited consultation with the sector on the proposal and DET’s failure to engage with the sector in a timely way.”
Recommendation 1
The Greens recommend these bills not proceed.
Senator Mehreen Faruqi
Member