2019-12-05
I rise to speak on the Education Legislation Amendment (Tuition Protection and Other Measures) Bill 2019 and its companion bills that establish the HELP and the VSL tuition protection levies.
The existing Tuition Protection Service, or TPS, protects international students, placing them in equivalent courses or providing a refund when providers collapse. The bills before us today expand the TPS to cover students with VET student loans and HELP loans and, in doing so, the existing Tuition Protection Service's director will become the director of the new the new VSL and HELP schemes. And the remit of the Tuition Protection Fund Advisory Board will expand to take in the two new funds.
The Greens recognise the need to protect students, particularly those at risk from some dodgy education providers who put profit ahead of quality. We recall all too well the appalling tactics used by unscrupulous providers in the past. Students fell victim to targeted doorknocking, with salespeople offering inducements to sign up to expensive courses they never received. Thousands of students were overcharged for poor-quality training, a legacy that continues. Just this month, we saw Unique International College fined $4.2 million for enrolling people from remote New South Wales communities in online courses costing nearly $27,000, by offering them free laptops. While much of this behaviour has been rightly banned, we know that dodgy providers will still do anything they can to turn a profit, so it's important to have in place tuition protection arrangements that appropriately safeguard students, which is why we support these bills.
While these bills make some effort towards that goal, in typical Liberal-National fashion, they manage to continue to degrade TAFEs and ignore the rot at the heart of the conservatives' approach to education. A publicly owned and properly funded TAFE system plays an essential role in building an economically and socially just society by offering lifelong educational opportunities and skills development. But these bills, as they stand now, slug TAFEs that are already egregiously underfunded with an administrative levy that is entirely unwarranted. In the inquiry into the expansion of the tuition protection scheme, the Australian Education Union put the situation well when they said:
… students taking out loans to undertake vocational education should be protected and assisted in the case of provider or course closure, but TAFEs should not be punished for the failures of the mass privatisation of vocational education in Australia nor for the lack of quality and rigor of some private RTOs.
Fundamentally, if you're setting up a scheme to ensure against the impact of defaults, the cost of that scheme to providers should match their risk of default. Quite rightly, this is reflected in the exemption from the TPS administrative levy of low-risk table A providers, like our public universities, which leaves us, as well as unions and student groups, wondering why TAFEs were not similarly exempted in the bill as it stands now.
TAFE's extremely low risk of default means that they're exceeding unlikely to trigger the new tuition protection scheme. The consequence of this is that TAFE's participation in the scheme, established by these bills, will be primarily as a second provider, accepting students from providers who have defaulted on their obligations to students by shutting down or cancelling a course. Despite this, TAFEs aren't exempt from the administrative levy in the bills before us and face, according to the evidence provided by TAFE directors Australia, around $670,000 a year just in administrative fees. This would really amount to TAFEs being forced to use funding that could otherwise have gone to training to subsidise a scheme their students are unlikely to benefit from. I find it absolutely absurd that anyone could look at the burden these bills place on TAFEs to subsidise the administration of the scheme their students wouldn't be benefiting from and think that that's okay.
TAFEs and government owned providers ought to be exempt from any levy under the new TPS and the Greens have circulated Committee of the Whole amendments to effect this. We have now seen exactly the same amendments from the government to amend their own bill. Thankfully, the government has seen sense and listened to stakeholders on this issue. In addition to burdening TAFE with the administrative levy, it does nothing to remedy the disturbing lack of tertiary knowledge expertise, to fund the VSL and HELP advisory boards to provide advice to the board for setting the risk levy. TAFE directors Australia expressed to the inquiry:
Current members with education background, apart from the chair, are not experienced in tertiary education, especially vocational education and would not be alert to the inherent risks in the sector’s schemes and volatility around closures.
In fact, the government's neglect of the advisory board is much worse than that. The board can have up to seven non-government members, but, as at 30 June 2019 only four non-government members have been appointed. They have left chairs empty where experts could be sitting. Among the four who have been appointed, the sole member with relevant tertiary education experience is the chair, Ms Helen Zimmerman. Who are the rest? Good old Liberal Party mates, of course.
In a typically disgusting doing of favours, the Liberals have stacked the board with two former party advisers and a two-time Liberal Party election candidate, each collecting up to $584 each day they work in the role. None of them, as far as I am aware, have the kind of sector-specific tertiary education experience needed to evaluate risk in the sector and evaluate providers, in order to levy tens of millions of dollars. And the minister hasn't kept the appointments middle of the road, either. Among the Liberal pals appointed to the board is Dr Kevin Donnelly—the same Kevin Donnelly who last week used the N-word three times in a speech promoting his new book at a launch attended by Mr Tony Abbott and the same Kevin Donnelly who was chief of staff to Kevin Andrews when he was a minister and raves publicly about PC ideology destroying childhood.
The bills before us call for qualifications or experience relevant to the job, b what we get is Liberal Party hacks receiving favours. The Liberals need to end this disgraceful game of mates. They need to guarantee real expertise and tertiary education experience—make sure that it is present on the board. In recognition of their long-standing expertise in tertiary education and their role as second providers to students from providers in default, the Australian Greens believe the advisory board should have at least one representative from TAFEs amongst its membership, as well as other members with experience in the sector. I will be moving amendments to fix this mess.
That that these bills do nothing to address the destruction the Liberal-National government has wrought on public VET in Australia is, I think, a real shame. Skills and training have been underfunded by tens of millions of dollars in the last year alone. We saw, recently, Labor and Liberals team up to abolish the $4 billion education infrastructure fund. In the last year alone, TAFE student numbers have been allowed to drop by 1.9 per cent, while subject enrolments have dropped by 5.7 per cent and training hours have dropped by 6.4 per cent. More disturbing still is that the number of students in nationally recognised programs dropped 16.2 per cent from 2015 to 2018, while we have a national shortage of skilled workers in 27 of 33 technician and trade categories.
Labor ought not to escape that blame. Their indulgence of for-profit providers and introduction of contestable funding helped push public provision of VET to the edge. Even with new tuition protection arrangements in place, students will continue having to handle prohibitive loan fees and the severe disruption that any provider closure entails. It is clear, as the National Union of Students told the inquiry, that for vocational education to become a more secure and attractive option for students, more must change in the public discourse and national strategic policy spaces. No expansion of tuition protection measures can mitigate the systemic risk introduced by the ongoing shift of public funding for training from low-risk TAFEs and public institutions to high-risk, for-profit providers, as detailed in the AEU submission. When extending tuition protection, it is vital that the parliament be mindful not to give students a false sense of security in commencing education with for-profit providers, which are at greater risk of default.
We can do so much better by students and so much better by society. To support students, the government must reverse its underfunding of skills and training and restore publicly owned, fully funded providers to the centre of the VET system. I refuse to just fiddle around the edges or allow the ongoing privatisation of education to erode our future. Students leaving university or TAFE now face greater pressures than ever before, including high youth unemployment and record housing and living costs. Being saddled with tens of thousands of dollars in student debt that takes decades to repay is unsustainable and unfair. That's why the Greens' plan for free TAFE and uni for everyone, for all their lives, is the bold change we need to build a more equal and just society.
Committee of the Whole AmendmentIn respect of the Education Legislation Amendment (Tuition Protection and Other Measures) Bill 2019, I move the Greens amendment on sheet 8809:
(1) Schedule 1, page 31 (after line 28), after item 48, insert:
48A After paragraph 55C(1)(a)
Insert:
(aa) a representative from the relevant vocational education or training bodies;
48B After subsection 55C(1)
Insert:
Requirement for Board members appointed under paragraph (1)(aa)
(1A) A person is not eligible for appointment as a Board member under paragraph (1)(aa) unless:
(a) the Minister has given a notice in writing to each head of a relevant vocational education or training body:
(i) specifying the person the Minister is proposing to appoint; and
(ii) stating the reasons the Minister is proposing to appoint the person; and
(iii) inviting the head to make submissions, in writing, to the Minister within 28 days after receiving the notice; and
(b) the Minister has considered any submissions received within that period and is reasonably satisfied the person has the support of a majority of the heads of the relevant vocational education or training bodies.
(1B) A body established under the following to provide vocational education or training is a relevant vocational education or training body:
(a) the Technical and Further Education Commission Act 1990 (NSW);
(b) the Education and Training Reform Act 2006 (Vic.);
(c) the TAFE Queensland Act 2013 (Qld);
(d) the Vocational Education and Training Act 1996 (WA);
(e) the TAFE SA Act 2012 (SA);
(f) the Training and Workforce Development Act 2013 (Tas.);
(g) the Canberra Institute of Technology Act 1987 (ACT).
I explained earlier in my speech in the second reading debate that these amendments are actually putting some expertise and TAFE representation on the Tuition Protection Fund Advisory Board to make sure that that expertise is there when decisions are being made about TPS.