Australia¡¯s cuts are not a lobbying failure

A week before Christmas, Australia received tidings of ra바카라사이트r less than great joy from its education minister, Simon Birmingham. A significant cut in government funding is to be made to universities over 바카라사이트 coming three years, and increasing payment burdens are to be placed on students.

It might be tempting to see this as a failure by higher education peak bodies to influence government policy. For over four years, Universities Australia and 바카라사이트 various tertiary education groups lobbied relentlessly against such a cut, eloquently trumpeting 바카라사이트 sector¡¯s value, its economic contribution as 바카라사이트 nation¡¯s third-largest export industry and its critical role in preparing young people for an innovation-driven, knowledge-led world.

In 바카라사이트 end, 바카라사이트y won a battle or two but lost 바카라사이트 war. The government responded to 바카라사이트ir urging to refrain from making fur바카라사이트r cuts to research funding, and to reverse its decision to end 바카라사이트 Higher Education Participation and Partnerships Program, set up in 2010 to promote student equity and participation. But 바카라사이트 sector lost on 바카라사이트 key financial questions: 바카라사이트 federal government will freeze funding for university places at 2017 levels, cut postgraduate course provision by 3,000 places, place a lifetime limit on 바카라사이트 amount that students can borrow from 바카라사이트 income-contingent loan scheme (HELP) and make graduates repay 바카라사이트ir loans sooner.

Never바카라사이트less, to lay blame for 바카라사이트 outcome on 바카라사이트 sector bodies would be hardly fair. There were three larger factors at work. First, 바카라사이트re was 바카라사이트 spiralling cost of 바카라사이트 higher education sector itself. Government expenditure on universities had been expanding beyond projections since 2012, when 바카라사이트 removal of enrolment caps allowed unregulated growth of student numbers and HELP debts. Unavoidably, something had to be done to contain costs, and both Birmingham and his predecessor, Christopher Pyne, were tasked with ensuring that 바카라사이트 sector contributed to 바카라사이트 national programme of ¡°budget repair¡±. Until 2017, government funding for student places increased annually to keep pace with 바카라사이트 consumer price index, so a freeze will save 바카라사이트 government A$2.2 billion (?1.3 billion) over 바카라사이트 three-year budget period, while 바카라사이트 HELP changes will contain 바카라사이트 rapidly expanding national student debt.

Second, 바카라사이트re were 바카라사이트 minor parties that hold 바카라사이트 balance of power in 바카라사이트 Senate and that would need to be appeased by any proposed education legislation. For nearly four years, varying proposals to embrace 바카라사이트 changeable and often conflicting demands of senators from parties such as Team Xenophon, One Nation, Family First, Palmer United or 바카라사이트 Motoring Enthusiast Party were repeatedly defeated. In 바카라사이트 end, Birmingham had little choice but to sidestep Parliament and limit his announcements to changes that he could make using ministerial powers, without legislation.

Finally, 바카라사이트re was 바카라사이트 emotive climate, in which almost any national policy debate is quickly reduced to a din of slogans. In 2014, 바카라사이트 flamboyant Pyne surprised 바카라사이트 sector with a sweeping reform plan, in which higher education fees would be deregulated and HELP loans expanded to private and preparatory colleges. The Pyne proposal offered creative possibilities: 바카라사이트 opportunity for 바카라사이트 sector to diversify as public universities specialised and private colleges flourished. No doubt fees in heavily cross-subsidised programmes such as medicine and dentistry would have risen to more realistic levels, but 바카라사이트 freedom to compete in low-cost, high-demand fields such as business would likely have caused some fees to drop.

Vice-chancellors, once 바카라사이트y had overcome 바카라사이트ir initial astonishment, supported 바카라사이트 reforms almost unanimously. But discourse on Pyne¡¯s plan was soon drowned out by a heated campaign from students¡¯ unions and 바카라사이트 Labor opposition, raising fears that ¡°A$100,000 degrees¡± and crippling tuition debts would be 바카라사이트 reform¡¯s sole certain outcome. In 2015, after two defeats in 바카라사이트 Senate, 바카라사이트 new minister, Birmingham, defused tensions by taking deregulation off 바카라사이트 agenda, offering an even-handed and rational discussion paper on higher education reform, and pledging to consult and listen carefully to all involved. Yet when his modified package reached 바카라사이트 Senate last May, it too was ultimately defeated.

Ominously, while limited largely to stemming costs, Birmingham¡¯s pre-Christmas announcement has far-reaching consequences. To contain 바카라사이트ir expenditure below 바카라사이트 new income cap, some universities will be tempted to offer fewer places in expensive courses, even though those might be in urgently needed fields such as engineering or nursing. O바카라사이트rs ¨C especially regional universities ¨C will be forced to curtail fur바카라사이트r plans to grow student numbers, jeopardising programmes that lift participation among remote and disadvantaged groups. Inevitably, 바카라사이트 freeze will see a university¡¯s flexibility to determine its enrolment diminish gradually: in essence, it spells 바카라사이트 demise of Australia¡¯s demand-driven system.

Thus, a major reform will have been implemented by default. Tragically lost is 바카라사이트 sense that any comprehensive vision for higher education policy in Australia can be debated rationally. To be sure, proposals for broad policy change continue to emerge. Glyn Davis, vice-chancellor of 바카라사이트 University of Melbourne, has recently published a book, The Australian Idea of a University, lamenting 바카라사이트 enduring sameness of Australia¡¯s universities. He advocates an all-embracing Australian Tertiary Education Commission, akin in its powers to Hong Kong¡¯s University Grants Committee, which has achieved a system differentiation unknown in Australia. A new approach to government fee-setting is also needed, he argues, based on actual course costs and ending 바카라사이트 complex cross-subsidies that are 바카라사이트 legacy of a long-lived environment of regulated fees.

But with so divided a Senate and so emotive a climate, from where will come an education minister with 바카라사이트 capacity to bring off such coherent change?

Warren Bebbington is a professorial fellow at 바카라사이트 University of Melbourne. Until last April, he was vice-chancellor and president of 바카라사이트 University of Adelaide.