By Zanny Begg
On September 15, the ALP launched its education policy for the federal election. Its key promises for tertiary education: $110 million in increased operating grants over the next three years; abolition of up-front fees for domestic undergraduates; an increase in the Higher Education Contribution Scheme (HECS) repayment threshold; and a progressive lowering of the age of independent status for student youth allowance from 25 to 23 years.
Labor intends to win votes by posturing as the defender of public education, but reading between the lines reveals that these policy initiatives leave a lot to be desired.
The key issue in tertiary education is the level of government funding. Real funding levels began to drop under the 1975 Fraser Liberal government and continued to do so under Labor from 1983 to 1996. In 1996, under the Howard government, $1 billion was slashed from university operating grants.
These cuts have meant that courses have been slashed, classes have become overcrowded, and the resources of universities have been stretched to breaking point. Student numbers have climbed from around 350,000 in 1983 to around 630,000 in 1995, a period during which funding per student has declined.
The university system in Australia is in crisis. The solution is an increase in government spending on education. This is not what the ALP is proposing.
A $110 million increase in operating grants for universities is a drop in the ocean. The ALP's policy document highlights the Coalition's $1 billion cut in 1996. However, Labor will not restore funding to pre-1996 levels. Labor highlights that 21,000 places were lost under the Coalitions cuts. It promises to restore only 5100.
The abolition of up-front fees for undergraduates is a welcome initiative. Since 1996, the student movement has been battling the introduction of fees at a number of universities.
This policy is designed to win popularity among students but it is largely an empty gesture.
Since the introduction of up-front fees for undergraduates in 1996, less then 800 fee-paying places have been taken up by domestic undergraduates. The vice-chancellor of UTS, Tony Blake, described the introduction of fees as an "embarrassing flop".
Whilst the majority of students can still enter university on a HECS-funded place, there is little incentive to pay up to $110,000 for a degree.
Abolishing up-front fees for domestic undergraduates will be an important ideological victory against the user-pays mentality, but it will make little financial difference for university funding levels. In fact, the Senate's estimates committee revealed earlier this year that, rather then being a financial winner, universities lost $5 million through the introduction of fees.
Labor's record in relation to university fees should make students wary. In 1985 it introduced up-front fees for overseas students. In 1987, Labor introduced the first across the board fee for domestic undergraduates, the $250 Higher Education Administration Charge.
This policy met so much opposition it was abandoned in favour of the Higher Education Contribution Scheme (HECS) system in 1989.
In 1994, the ALP voted for the deregulation of post-graduate fees. In 1995, the ALP voted for up-front fees for permanent resident non-citizens. Not surprisingly, reversal of these policies does not feature in Labor's 1998 election campaign material.
The decision to increase the HECS repayment threshold is to be welcomed. The ALP promises to raise the HECS payment threshold by $1000 per year in the year 2000.
It should be remembered, however, that between 1974 and 1987, tertiary education was free. It was a Labor government which abandoned free education in 1989 with the introduction of HECS.
Since 1989, HECS levels have increased and payment thresholds have reduced. Inching up the HECS payment threshold (starting two years after the election) will do little to ease the pain for students.
Neither will it solve the funding crisis for higher education. Currently, 14% of the HECS debt accrued by students has been virtually written off by the government as many students are failing to earn a high enough income to make payments. Raising the HECS payment threshold, whilst continuing to starve the university system of funds, will only exacerbate the funding crisis.
A party genuinely committed to public education would abolish the HECS system altogether. Money to fund education can come from boosting corporate taxation and redirecting the billions wasted on the "defence" budget.
Labor's last sweetener — the promise to lower the age of independent status for students on youth allowance from 25 to 23 — reveals its opportunism. The ALP voted down two motions from the Democrats to lower the age of independent status to 18 or 21 earlier this year.
Students have reason to be suspicious about whether Labor will increase funding for student income support. Under the last Labor government, the age of independent status did drop from 25 (in 1992) to 22 (in 1995) but, simultaneously, eligibility criteria for Austudy was tightened so that fewer students overall were able to receive payments.
Will Labor even keep the paltry promises it has made? In the early 1980s, the Fraser government attempted to slash the higher education system. A series of mass rallies, strikes and pickets forced the government to back down. The ALP won the 1983 election with promises to defend public education from the attacks of the Liberals. Two years later it began the process of dismantling free education.
Between 1983 and its defeat in 1996, Labor presided over a massive shift from public to private funding in the higher education system. Labor does not promise to reverse this.
For students, Labor's education policies are more about looking good than actually changing anything. Students deserve better.