Graham Perrett (Moreton, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Hansard source

Grow up, yes. Have a slightly different approach. But, no, they carried it on into the cabinet room, and so we have that shameful legacy where, compared to other OECD countries that went ahead by, say, 50 per cent, we declined by four per cent.

The Rudd government is about restoring fairness and balance to ensure that student amenities and services are sustainable into the future. This bill gives universities the option—there is that word: ‘option’—to collect a compulsory student services fee of up to $250 per year from 1 July this year, just in time for next semester. Importantly, this fee will be channelled directly into student services, and universities will be able to decide whether to charge the fee at all—as I said, up to $250—and, if they do charge it, how much it will be. So we do understand the word ‘choice’ well and truly but we also understand that university students are humans and need to be cared for.

Guidelines will be developed to give universities a clear outline of the range of services and amenities the fee can and cannot be used for. So ignore the rants of those opposite, who are revisiting the slights and grudges from their university days—this is all about fairness and making sure the fees are used for proper purposes. I understand consultation is underway on these guidelines. We expect to see the money go towards services like child care, health care, sports and student advocacy services. So ignore the list put forward by those opposite; this is fair dinkum and will look after university students.

This bill will also introduce national student representation and advocacy protocols to ensure that university students have representation on university boards, giving students a voice on campus. If you talk to anyone at Griffith University, in my electorate, they will tell you the previous government’s stance had a negative impact on student services. Even the student union was forced to shut down, putting an end to some crucial student services. As I said earlier, unfortunately such an event can seriously damage people’s lives.

Thinking back to my university days, I do say, without any grudge or anything like, that I was not involved in student unions at all. But I think of the people that, but for a helping hand, would have dropped out of university altogether—people that but for a bit of child care would not have been able to access university at all. Over the last couple of weeks, in the light of this pending legislation, I have spoken to a number of students at Griffith University. Even when they were busy with orientation week, they were only too keen to talk about this bill because they know that any fee imposed by the university will go directly to student services. One student told me:

It is going to mean that all students will again have access to counselling services, health services, and academic advocacy.

And under the guidelines, students will have say in the running of their university at the highest levels.

This bill will inject a bit of heart back into campus life by reinvigorating sports and special interest clubs and other services. It is basically about ensuring that there is learning with soul. The previous speaker, the member for Tangney, Dr Jensen, seems to think that learning is just about the empirical acquisition of content. Those days are long gone—the days of just flipping back the head and pouring in the content, and saying that is all you need to get by in the world, are long gone. The information age is now here. We need to be able to process things, and we realise that sports and special interest clubs and all those other activities make for much better students. The days of the sage on the stage are gone. It is now, like teaching, about the guide on the side.

This bill before the House requires higher education providers funded through the Commonwealth Grant Scheme to ensure that students have access to student support services. So you could not put all the money into, say, a rugby union club or something like that; you actually have to provide a range of services to ensure that everyone is supported.

I also welcome the measures in this bill to ensure that the fee is not an added burden to struggling students. Eligible students will be able to take out a loan, similar to HECS, that will enable them to pay their fee. Obviously, the fee will be payable later, once their income improves, as so often happens when people go to university—it does tend to give people the ability to access a higher income bracket.

Part-time students will also be taken into account. Under the guidelines, part-time students will be charged less than the maximum fee, and some will have no charge at all. I would imagine that for some of the external students that will be the case. I should declare an interest here in that my wife is in her last year of law as an external and part-time student at Queensland University of Technology. I should have declared that upfront, I guess. Either way, I am very supportive of this legislation.

I understand that there are some, certainly in the student community, who do not think that this bill goes far enough. I have certainly had representations along those lines in my office, both here and in Brisbane. I am sorry that this legislation is not all things to all people but, like so much of the Rudd government legislation, it is about balance. It is about doing the right thing for the majority of people and it is about restoring common sense to our interactions with people rather than treating them as mere economic units.

As I said, this is a balanced approach and is not a return to compulsory student unionism. This bill makes no change to proposed section 19-37 (1) of the act, which prohibits universities from requiring a student to join a student organisation. The Rudd government believes that students should not be forced to pay over-the-top, upfront fees but is committed to ensuring that university students have access to vital services on campus. I remind those opposite, again, that this will mean that lives can be saved. The pressures of moving from school to university, from the bush to the city, can sometimes be too much, especially for country kids, I would suggest. So they do need a helping hand. They are vital services. I strongly support the approach taken by the Deputy Prime Minister in this bill and I believe that a reasonable contribution will be good for students and for universities.

We should not forget that last year the Rudd government announced funding of $500 million for the Better Universities Renewal Fund to support IT, science labs and other laboratories, libraries and other student amenities, as well as $24 million to increase childcare assistance for parents who are studying at university or TAFE. Obviously, this measure is crucial to so many women in giving them an opportunity to change their economic circumstances or to have a career path. I shudder to think of the number of fine minds that might have been denied a chance to have a career but for the support that is given through child care at universities.

This bill also amends the Higher Education Support Act to improve the privacy standards for tertiary admission centres. Relevant student information that is shared between the government, higher education providers and tertiary admission centres will be subject to strict privacy requirements. This is a simple amendment to ensure that the privacy rights of students are protected. It is important that this information is handled delicately. Anyone who can recall their first round of university offers when they left high school will recall that it is an incredibly exciting time—and obviously a sad time for some people—so it is important that we do the right thing with this information to ensure it is not handled incorrectly. Any fair-minded, intelligent person, whether or not they went to university, would understand that the legislation before the House gets the balance right. It ensures that students will have access to the services they need on campus, without imposing a hefty financial burden on those who cannot afford it. As I said, there is a HECS style support available.

This legislation is about hope and about ensuring that we protect the jobs of the next generation and beyond. As I said, those opposite whom I have heard in this debate really need to get rid of some of that baggage that they acquired at university. I do not know what went on in those Liberal clubs at universities, but there are obviously too many slights, too many grudges. People need to move on—

See this speech in context