Editorial 29 October 2001

In less than a fortnight Australians of voting age will be asked to choose a new federal government. Probabilities are that either Labor or the conservative Coalition will control the House of Representatives while the Australian Democrats may just hold the balance of power in the Senate.

The two major adversaries are pitching their election promises on the usual assumption that voters are swayed more by instant gratification than the prospect of longer term national well being. The approach is to present a temptingly packaged bag of carrots to the electorate whereby those sections of the population holding crucial votes get just enough inducements to obtain their votes. Each party accuses the other of dealing in smoke and mirrors; each claims they will make the nation more secure, with the Coalition implying that it will protect our shores (presumably from highly trained terrorists who approach our continent aboard leaky boats destined for immediate detention) while Labor suggests that we will be reduced to personal penury if they don't gain power.

All of this is being played out against a background of "tax cuts" (they don't really exist, it's a matter of taking less out of one of your pockets and more from a different one) and balanced budgeting (see smoke and mirrors, above). Both major parties agree that education is a good thing with Labor playing Robin Hood by taking from the "rich schools" and the Coalition giving to them "so as to reduce the burden on the public school system". Everyone's an altruist.

Meanwhile at least 40% of those teaching maths and science in secondary school are not qualified to do so, and that is probably an underestimate. So far neither of the major contenders has made any pronouncements during the election campaign with regard to alleviating the subsidence of Australian tertiary education. Labor has put no clothes on the body of the Knowledge Nation paper it put out four months ago although their official campaign launch on Wednesday may put a nappy or two on the infant. Currently it remains naked as the day of its birth and if Barry Jones has been touring the nation selling his conception to The People, he's been doing so very, very quietly. The Coalition seems to have had done with higher education and research once its parsimonious five year plan for Backing Australia's Ability was issued. This was sheeted home in September when the Senate Committee's Universities in Crisis Report on Higher Education was published with the Liberal Party committee members refusing to sign off on it  stating it was a political stunt. Neil Rudenstine made news in July when he summed up the state of British higher education as moving from "a disaster into a nightmare" and Nature in a recent feature stated he wasn't saying anything that wouldn't be heard in staff tearooms around the island. What Rudenstine's description of Australian higher education might be doesn't bear contemplating. Here the government remains in aggressive denial regarding  for example the sending of civil engineering students into the workplace who have been inadequately taught physics and maths as perhaps a bit unfortunate but really nothing more than that. And branding criticism of the system as being unpatriotic. The point might warrant a philosophical debate as to who is more culpable, those that state the university system is in crisis or those who continue to perpetrate the calamity.

The Australian Democrat Leader, Senator Stott Despoja, is also their spokeswoman for both science and education. To her credit the Democrats have published their platform on higher education and make the commitment:

Education is an investment not a cost
    The Commonwealth makes a handsome profit from its investment in higher education. A $5.3 billion investment, per annum, by Government returns $8 billion pa in terms of receipts from graduates’ direct and indirect taxes. This figure does not take into account income and other taxes paid by university staff, which effectively lowers the government contribution, nor the massive flow-on social benefits of education.¹

The Democrats will:
    ·provide an additional $500 million for operating grants to universities in 2002 as part of a 20% increase over three years. This will restore funding to 1996 levels and provide a stronger basis to increase resources over the next 10 years.

    ·Review funding models to ensure geographical isolation, innovations, the differing needs of a diverse student cohort and the national interest are reflected in funding arrangements.

¹Borland, et al (2000), Returns to Investment in higher education, Melbourne Institute of Applied Economic and social research, Melbourne

It is a safe assumption that the Democrats will not be in a position to form government, nevertheless it will be interesting to see just how tough they will be on this issue if they hold the balance of power in the Senate.

Between them the Coalition and Labor are liable to sweetener and balance budget the nation through an event horizon from which it will be unable to return unless Australians give them a wakeup call that we are not prepared to sell them our birthright for beads and trinkets.
 

Alex Reisner
The Funneled Web