|
senate vote 2014-03-17#5
Edited by
system
on
2014-10-07 16:21:41
|
Title
Description
The majority voted in favour of a [http://www.openaustralia.org/senate/?id=2014-03-17.135.2 motion] introduced by Senator [http://publicwhip-test.openaustraliafoundation.org.au/mp.php?mpn=Kim_Carr&mpc=Senate&house=senate Kim Carr], which was:"No. 1—That the [http://www.comlaw.gov.au/Details/F2013L02070 Commonwealth Scholarships Guidelines (Education) 2013], made under section 238-10 of the [http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/cth/consol_act/hesa2003271/ Higher Education Support Act 2003], be disallowed, and""No. 2—That [http://www.comlaw.gov.au/Details/F2013L02078 Amendment No. 1] to the Commonwealth Grant Scheme Guidelines 2012, made under section 238-10 of the Higher Education Support Act 2003, be disallowed."Because this motion was successful, this 2013 Guideline and amendment to the 2012 Guideline are now disallowed and therefore cease to have effect.(Read more about what it means to disallow a legislative instrument [http://www.aph.gov.au/About_Parliament/Senate/Powers_practice_n_procedures/Brief_Guides_to_Senate_Procedure/No_19 here].
)''Background to the motion''The amendment to the Commonwealth Scholarships Guidelines (Education) 2012 and the Commonwealth Scholarships Guidelines (Education) 2013 were introduced to implement an efficiency dividend to university funding as part of the 2013-14 Budget.(See the explanatory statements of the amendment to the 2012 Guideline [http://www.comlaw.gov.au/Details/F2013L02078/Explanatory%20Statement/Text here] and the 2013 Guideline [http://www.comlaw.gov.au/Details/F2013L02070/Explanatory%20Statement/Text here]. Learn more about these cuts on Lateline [http://www.abc.net.au/lateline/content/2013/s3737627.htm here].) The efficiency dividend is a reduction in loading per [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Commonwealth_Supported_Place#Commonwealth_supported_students Commonwealth supported place].- The majority voted in favour of a [motion](http://www.openaustralia.org/senate/?id=2014-03-17.135.2) introduced by Senator [Kim Carr](http://publicwhip-rails.openaustraliafoundation.org.au/mp.php?mpn=Kim_Carr&mpc=Senate&house=senate), which was:
- "No. 1—That the [Commonwealth Scholarships Guidelines (Education) 2013](http://www.comlaw.gov.au/Details/F2013L02070), made under section 238-10 of the [Higher Education Support Act 2003](http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/cth/consol_act/hesa2003271/), be disallowed, and"
- "No. 2—That [Amendment No. 1](http://www.comlaw.gov.au/Details/F2013L02078) to the Commonwealth Grant Scheme Guidelines 2012, made under section 238-10 of the Higher Education Support Act 2003, be disallowed."
- Because this motion was successful, this 2013 Guideline and amendment to the 2012 Guideline are now disallowed and therefore cease to have effect.(Read more about what it means to disallow a legislative instrument [here](http://www.aph.gov.au/About_Parliament/Senate/Powers_practice_n_procedures/Brief_Guides_to_Senate_Procedure/No_19). )
- _Background to the motion_
- The amendment to the Commonwealth Scholarships Guidelines (Education) 2012 and the Commonwealth Scholarships Guidelines (Education) 2013 were introduced to implement an efficiency dividend to university funding as part of the 2013-14 Budget.(See the explanatory statements of the amendment to the 2012 Guideline [here](http://www.comlaw.gov.au/Details/F2013L02078/Explanatory%20Statement/Text) and the 2013 Guideline [here](http://www.comlaw.gov.au/Details/F2013L02070/Explanatory%20Statement/Text). Learn more about these cuts on Lateline [here](http://www.abc.net.au/lateline/content/2013/s3737627.htm).) The efficiency dividend is a reduction in loading per [Commonwealth supported place](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Commonwealth_Supported_Place#Commonwealth_supported_students).
|
|
senate vote 2014-03-17#5
Edited by
mackay staff
on
2014-06-05 12:27:59
|
Title
Regulations and Determinations — Commonwealth Scholarships Guidelines (Education) 2013, Commonwealth Grant Scheme Guidelines 2012; Disallowance- Regulations and Determinations - Commonwealth Scholarships Guidelines (Education) 2013, Commonwealth Grant Scheme Guidelines 2012 - Disallowance
Description
<p class="speaker">Kim Carr</p><p>by leave—I move:</p><p class="italic">No. 1—That the Commonwealth Scholarships Guidelines (Education) 2013, made under section 238-10 of the Higher Education Support Act 2003, be disallowed, and</p><p class="italic">No. 2—That Amendment No. 1 to the Commonwealth Grant Scheme Guidelines 2012, made under section 238-10 of the Higher Education Support Act 2003, be disallowed.</p><p>I move these disallowance motions because Labor are opposed to the unrelenting attacks on education being displayed by this government. We are opposed to the government's ideological obsession with cuts for what appears to be nothing more than the sake of cuts. We are opposed to the breaking of an election promise—namely, the government committed to the maintenance of education funding for schools. If I recall rightly, the commitment made by various opposition spokespeople at the time was that there would be not one dollar less for schools under a coalition government than there would be under a Labor government. Of course, that is not to be the case.</p><p>I say this in the context of Labor's outstanding record when it comes to higher education, a record that put an additional 190,000 students into our universities. If you look at the forward estimates, under Labor there was an increase in funding for universities to some $17 billion by 2017. Under Labor, there was a funding boost for science, for research and for innovation of 35 per cent. We are very proud of that record. In contrast, the coalition have a lot to answer for. They show every sign of hostility towards education, which is in part because, in Liberal Party iconography, there is a view that universities in particular are institutions of the cultural Left. We know the reality is a little bit more complex than that, but how quickly the new government have changed their tune for political convenience.</p><p>The Prime Minister, if I recall rightly, when the Labor government was in office, took issue with the efficiency dividend; now, in government, he is adopting that position. But he is not putting the savings towards schools. He is not putting them towards building a much better program for schools, on which the prosperity of this nation ultimately depends. The once-in-a-lifetime reform plan for schools that Labor initiated, commonly known as the Gonski reforms, provided $11.5 billion backed by funding guarantees from the states. That national program of expansion of school education is now to be jettisoned by this government. Mr Abbott is in fact proposing a reduction in funding for school education, particularly in out years 5 and 6 under the program announced by the Labor government and which the states signed up to. What we see here is a clear breaking of the government's election promise and a clear betrayal of education—broken promises in terms of schooling but also in terms of our higher education sector. So Labor will oppose these changes.</p><p>There is clearly a presumption within this government that the principles of equity, quality and justice when it comes to education should not be honoured. The education portfolio is essentially in a condition that can be characterised as a shambles. I remember, with some disdain, that the Minister for Education, Minister Pyne, sought to execute a triple inverted backflip on funding almost in one day, which is truly a remarkable achievement, even for this fine public institution! In the past, Mr Pyne argued that Gonski was in fact a 'conski'. Before the election he pledged to match Labor's funding dollar for dollar; he then said he could not guarantee that the money promised to schools under the Better Schools plan could be delivered. Then he abandoned the needs-based funding model. He signed off on agreements with the states—with Western Australia, Queensland and the Northern Territory—with no commitment from them at all in terms of the requirement for them to maintain their efforts. It was a desperate shambles. The Prime Minister then had to intervene to try to fix the resulting mess, following Minister Pyne's somewhat inept handling of all these issues.</p><p>None of this is a surprise, because what needs to be appreciated is that the coalition have form on these issues. When last elected to office in 1996, they undertook a program of quite extensive reductions in funding for universities—a full quarter of the cuts in the infamous Costello horror budget of 1996. Of course, none of that had been announced before the election either. So it will not be a surprise to me if the report of the Commission of Audit, when it is finally released, displays equal hostility towards universities.</p><p>Labor came to office determined to make things right. We increased funding of higher education from $8 billion in 2007 to $14 billion in 2013 and our funding was linked to a broad program of reform that set out our unwavering commitment to the principles of equity and quality. One in four of the students in university today are there due to the additional places delivered under the Labor government—one in four. Many of those students are from disadvantaged backgrounds, with many of them the first in their families to access higher education. There are some 36,000 more students from disadvantaged backgrounds attending universities now than there were under the previous conservative government.</p><p>This is a great enterprise and the importance of education cannot be overestimated. But we all understand how important the foundation stone of schooling is to ensuring future growth in our capacity to bridge the equity gap in higher education. It is ironic that the wreckers of Gonski are now suggesting that some of these issues in school education can just be dismissed. I think it is a remarkable irony that we are discussing these issues on the same day as the 14th annual 'Science meets Parliament' gala dinner. It is ironic because no doubt those opposite and their counterparts in the other place will find time in their diaries to shake hands with vice-chancellors and talk about their great passion for education.</p><p>They have to put their money where their mouth is. Their undermining of the schools reform program will have profound consequences for the future prosperity of this nation. We know they are walking away from the equity targets, we know they are washing their hands of universities and we know they are undermining the principle of equality of opportunity for everyone in this country. Changing the funding arrangements of universities in such a way as to achieve growth in consolidated revenue in order to meet the obsessions of the new government is a measure that we simply cannot support. I call on this chamber to fund the education system at all levels, to ensure that we maintain the principle of equity, to ensure that we maintain the principle of quality and, in order to do so, to disallow these instruments.</p> <p class="speaker">Scott Ryan</p><p>I have learned something tonight. I did not realise that Senator Carr was the shadow minister for sport or perhaps a former Minister for Sport from one of the many reshuffles that occurred under the previous regime—because what we just saw was a backflip worthy of the Winter Olympic Games. He just got the gold medal for doing backflips.</p><p>The truth is that he is moving a motion to disallow measures that the government he was a member of proposed. Nothing of what Senator Carr just said matters—nothing—because, when he had the chance to put his money where his mouth was, his government's record was to do exactly what these measures entail. When Labor had the chance, they did exactly this. The guidelines which the opposition are seeking to have disallowed are in fact Labor's own measures. The guidelines are to give effect to part of the efficiency dividend which the previous Labor government announced in April last year. They announced it in April, included it in the May budget and took it to the election as part of their Pre-Election Economic and Fiscal Outlook as a government measure.</p><p>The reason this efficiency dividend had to be introduced by the previous Labor government was their own profound financial irresponsibility—the massive deficits and ballooning public debt for which they were responsible. They knew the public did not buy their empty promises anymore. It is the need to overcome the legacy of financial recklessness left to the coalition by the Labor government that gives us no alternative but to proceed with Labor's savings measures, including these guidelines.</p><p>We are just trying to keep our promises, but on this occasion we are trying to keep Labor's promises too. These were measures the previous government took to the election. These were measures in the previous government's budget. All the coalition are seeking to do is implement what we said we would do and what they said they would do. I cannot help wondering whether the Green noise that hits our ears from down the far end of the chamber has yet again taken hold of the Labor Party's agenda.</p><p>They—and Senator Carr stood—in this chamber and defended these measures, yet he now has the gall to stand up and assert that somehow the coalition are reneging on our statements or valuing education differently from how the Labor government valued it. These were your measures. We are seeking to introduce them as we promised to—and as you promised to. For the Labor Party to come into this chamber and move these motions shows that they are absolutely bereft of any foundation in philosophy, policy or trust.</p><p>This government has actually been a friend of universities and students. We are working to reduce overregulation and excessive reporting requirements, we are funding every recommendation of the Australian Research Council, we are making it clear that Australia welcomes international students and we are taking sensible stock of the demand driven system. We have scrapped Labor's $2,000 cap on the tax deductibility of self-education expenses, one of the greatest assaults on individuals investing in their own education and productivity that any government has ever considered. We have rejected that. Labor took it to the election not caring about the impact it was going to have on workers, not caring about the impact on those who were seeking to improve their skills. Labor were simply seeking a budget saving.</p><p>What is Labor's record? Labor's record included the $2.8 billion of cuts announced without notice last April as part of an accounting trick to try to fictionalise the budget situation to make it look better—something the Australian people now know the truth about. They cut the Sustainable Research Excellence in Universities scheme by nearly $500 million in the 2012 Mid-Year Economic and Fiscal Outlook update. They put research funding on an unsustainable stop-start basis and failed to make any provision in the forward estimates for the National Collaborative Research Infrastructure Strategy or the Future Fellowships program of the Australian Research Council. They converted the Higher Education Endowment Fund—set up out of surpluses put aside by the previous coalition government to allow investment in the betterment of people over the long term—into a 'spendathon' fund which halved in value. The Labor government presided over an incredible drop in the number of international students coming to Australia. The list goes on. That is not the record of a friend of universities or a friend of students. It is a record of appalling financial and general mismanagement which Labor persist in pursuing in opposition, even while they reject the measures they took to the people only six months ago. We know that it is only by getting the nation's finances back in order that we will be able to give universities and students strong, sustainable, predictable and stable support.</p><p>I did not sense that Senator Carr had the same degree of passion in his voice about that speech. The truth is, whether it was on car funding or whether it was on higher education funding, Senator Carr could not carry his own colleagues, and today, when he came into this chamber, he had managed to get the Labor Party to agree to his policies when in opposition. Senator Carr referred to putting money where the mouth is. The Labor Party's money is where its mouth is. We are seeking to implement our promise. We are seeking to implement the Labor Party's promise. The only time that Senator Carr has been able to get his colleagues to agree is when they are in opposition. Whether it is car funding or higher education funding, because of the stop-start nature of it—we will pump it up in the forward estimates, then we will strip it away as a way to try and balance a budget—Labor assaulted this sector with the most worrying aspect of government policy, which is instability, unpredictability and a lack of trustworthiness. What they are asking this chamber to do tonight is to breach the commitment they made to the people and breach the commitment we made to the people. We are going to stand behind the commitments we made, and, on this occasion, we are going to stand behind the commitments that Labor made.</p> <p class='motion-notice motion-notice-truncated'>Long debate text truncated.</p>- The majority voted in favour of a motion introduced by Senator Kim Carr, which was:
- "No. 1—That the [http://www.comlaw.gov.au/Details/F2013L02070 Commonwealth Scholarships Guidelines (Education) 2013], made under section 238-10 of the [http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/cth/consol_act/hesa2003271/ Higher Education Support Act 2003], be disallowed, and"
- "No. 2—That [http://www.comlaw.gov.au/Details/F2013L02078 Amendment No. 1] to the Commonwealth Grant Scheme Guidelines 2012, made under section 238-10 of the Higher Education Support Act 2003, be disallowed."
- Because this motion was successful, this guideline and amendment to a guideline are now disallowed and therefore cease to have effect.[1]
- ''Background to the motion''
- The amendment to the Commonwealth Scholarships Guidelines (Education) 2012 and the Commonwealth Scholarships Guidelines (Education) 2013 were introduced to implement an efficiency dividend to university funding as part of the 2013-14 Budget.[2]
- ''References''
- * [1] Read more about what it means to disallow a legislative instrument [http://www.aph.gov.au/About_Parliament/Senate/Powers_practice_n_procedures/Brief_Guides_to_Senate_Procedure/No_19 here].
- * [2] See the explanatory statements of the amendment to the 2012 Guideline [http://www.comlaw.gov.au/Details/F2013L02078/Explanatory%20Statement/Text here] and the 2013 Guideline [http://www.comlaw.gov.au/Details/F2013L02070/Explanatory%20Statement/Text here]. Learn more about these cuts on Lateline [http://www.abc.net.au/lateline/content/2013/s3737627.htm here].
|