Opinion - 24 March 2001

 

Surely You're Joking, Mr. Howard

Earlier this month the National Tertiary Education Union submitted to the Federal Government a set of 12 recommendations for the 2001/02 budget to substantially improve Australia's tertiary education system. It's a carefully reasoned and conservatively costed set and is couched in frank and unambiguous terms. It ought to be required reading of every Federal MHR and Senator.

[An abridged version of the recommendations is given at the end of this piece.]

To introduce the matter:

"The stripping of public resources from universities by the Howard Government, which has driven this crisis [in university access and quality], is unprecedented in the history of Commonwealth involvement in university funding. The damage that was done to the accessibility and quality of Australia's universities in the first years of the Howard Government was severe, however the full ramifications of the changes to funding and fee structures have not yet been felt.

"At a time when there is growing global recognition of the need to invest in tertiary education, the Howard Government has chosen to abrogate its responsibility to provide for the social and economic security of Australia by bucking the international trend and cutting government investment in education.

"In this context the policy reversal by the Prime Minister in the area of research and development is insufficient to rectify the damage done during his tenure. The scale of the package required to restore the viability of an accessible and quality tertiary education sector far exceeds the commitments made in Backing Australia's Ability. In contrast to the recent realisation of the need to publicly invest in research and development, the Howard Government has put in place policies which have directly reduced access and quality. Worse still, it has chosen to do nothing to rectify the problems despite growing evidence of the damage which it has done."

In this framework it is worth reproducing the NTEU's figure 2 showing that the progressive upfront charges imposed on postgraduates has increased from 23% at the time the Howard Government was voted into office to 62% in 2000. These students are the members of our society who teach the teachers and who are expected to be the Nation's innovators.

 

In a recent Insight program on SBS (March 8th) it was point out that the student staff ratio at tertiary institutions had risen over 58% in the past 10 years. Figure 3 from the NTEU budget submission graphically illustrates the enormity of this increase. It is noteworthy that the bulk of that decline in staff to student ratio has occurred since the advent of the Howard Government.  Labor while by no means blameless, wasn't in the same league when it came to demolition.

 

Regarding its recommendations for bolstering research the NTEU's principal request is for an acceleration of the proposed increases to the Australian Research Council's (ARC) competitive grants together with raising the total over the coming five years to $864 million. By world standards that is still very modest.

 

Of course the NTEU makes the point that it is of little use making more money available for research grants if adequate facilities aren't available in which to do the work. Again their proposal is extremely modest suggesting an increase of 24% above that proposed by the Government, which - quite frankly - is pitiful considering the deplorable state of the facilities at our 38 universities.

 

The next twelve months hold promise of being one of Australia's most defining periods. Should a Labor Government ascend to power, just how will Mr. Beazley's still vague promises be crystallized? If the Australian Democrats hold the balance of power in the Senate just how will their assurances that they believe that science and education are a good thing worthy of support be demonstrated? And if the Coalition be reelected, will they take any notice of the concerns of our teachers and scientists?  Come to that do we Australians really care (really being code for proactively).

NTEU Budgetary Recommendations:

  1. RECOMMENDATION: That Government institute a single Higher Education Contribution Scheme rate set at $2,644 (estimated cost: $843 million p/a).

 

  1. RECOMMENDATION: That Government returns the initial HECS repayment threshold to the level of average male earnings, in three equal increases over the next three financial years (estimated cost: nil).

 

  1. RECOMMENDATION: That Government create 10,000 HECS exempt scholarships, to be allocated to fields of study deemed from time to time by government to areas of national importance or high labour market demand (estimated cost: $26.6 million p/a).

 

  1. RECOMMENDATION: That Government make provision for improving and adding value to participation in higher education...

 

  1. RECOMMENDATION: That Government urgently address the decline in Indigenous Australian participation in higher education by...

 

  1. RECOMMENDATION: That Government restore the 25,000 HECS liable postgraduate coursework places that have been cut from the higher education sector since 1996 (estimated cost: $200 million p/a).

 

  1. RECOMMENDATION: That Government immediately increase university funding per EFTSU by 20% to take account of the unfunded changes to cost structures over the last five years and initiate consultation with the university sector about mechanisms to prevent repetition of this situation (estimated cost: $1.02 billion p/a).

 

  1. RECOMMENDATION: That Government invest in development of the skills and knowledge of university staff, to assist universities to meet the demands of the knowledge economy (estimated cost: $3 million p/a).

 

  1. RECOMMENDATION: That Government bring forward the increases in ARC Competitive Grants announced in Backing Australia's Ability as outlined in Table 2, in order that 30% of the total increase is effective in 2002, 60% in 2003 and 80% in 2004 (estimated cost: $127.6 million over five years).

 

  1. RECOMMENDATION: That Government match the proposed increases in ARC Competitive Grants with corresponding increases in RIB [Research Infrastructure Block]  Grants Scheme as outlined in Table 4 (estimated cost: $81.8 million over five years).

 

  1. RECOMMENDATION: That Government restore research infrastructure funding to at least 40 cents in the grant dollar, as recommended in the West Review of Higher Education Funding and Policy (estimated cost: $140-$180 million p/a).

 

  1. RECOMMENDATION: That Government work to address the educational disadvantage of students from rural and isolated areas through the initiation of a Regional Education Development Fund. The Fund would provide resources to regional universities, TAFE institutes and Co-operative Research Centres involved in projects aimed at increasing economic development and job creation in regional areas (estimated cost: $100 million p/a).

Alex Reisner
The Funneled Web