REVIEW OF HIGHER EDUCATION FINANCING AND POLICY
SUBMISSION
by
E.S Allison
The Role of Education in Australia's Society and Economy
Education has a value in business and the improvement of the economy but the pursuit of knowledge and learning should also be seen as important for its own sake. If it is only linked to economic needs then education risks having its ethics compromised with regard to things such as research grants being allotted and courses being run only if they serve an economic purpose, despite their social or ethical value. Such an emphasis could also lead to scientific and medical research being conducted without due consideration being given to its ethical implications.
One of the main factors that empowers people of Western nations is our level of literacy across the population. In several countries, children rarely attend school beyond primary level while girls and women form a majority of the world's poor. Australia has a better record although it should not be complacent as our indigenous people are still very under-represented in universities, technical colleges and employment, especially white-collar work.
The Introduction and Effects of Fees.
The introduction of the higher education fees have already disadvantaged some people, preventing or curtailing their studies. In 1983 I commenced a degree in Western Australia to improve my opportunities for employment. At the time my husband and I were both unemployed and we had a small baby. I combined relief teaching with my external studies and my husband also did casual work as much as possible to keep us off the unemployment benefit for individual weeks at a time. We only qualified for some subsidised childcare because of my studies. My husband and I spent two and a half years sustaining ourselves with casual employment and the unemployment benefit intermittently. During that time we also had another baby, partly a decision made because we felt the uncertain work was going to continue for a long time and we did not want to have a large gap between our two children.
During this time our savings (we have never used credit and have gone without rather than buy luxuries) were severely eroded. While still unemployed and in my last part-time Honours year the HECS fees were introduced. This, I feel, was very discriminatory. I, as a woman dealing with unemployment and two children, had felt that I could only do my degree part-time. I studied over 7 years as an external student and in my attempts to better the outlook for myself and my family and to minimise use of the Social Security system , I got charged almost $1000 for my final year! I was lucky- I had a husband who supported my desire to study and we had been very careful with our money while still paying a mortgage which we had to arrange through a building society at higher interest because the banks were not interested in unemployed people. However, some others were less fortunate. I knew of two women who were also mature-aged students who could not continue their studies. One did not have enough money and the other woman's husband refused to pay the fees required for her to finish her degree!
I strongly believe that the introduction of fees, beginning with the HECS fees and now increasing to higher charges and full fees for some courses has and will seriously erode equal access to university education. Those who have access to less money, especially women, lower socio-economic groups, Southern Europeans and Aboriginals will continue to have reduced access.
There is another aspect concerning concerning the repayment of fees which also discriminates against people with less access to money. While the wealthy can afford to pay their fees upfront and receive a discount many lower-middle and low-income earners have to accrue their fees to be paid back later if and when they earn over a certain income each year.
For several years my earnings as a temporary and/or relief teacher were well below $10000 but on the two or three years that my earnings exceeded the threshold the appropriate amount was deducted from my pay. When I finally enquired about the amount that had been deducted as I felt I should have paid the debt off by that time, I was informed that the employee had to keep track of the fees deducted. This was difficult to do as the amounts were not recorded separately on the payslip. I was told by the tax office that the amounts deducted from one's pay were not immediately offset against the HECS debt and that this did not occur till the end of the financial year! Nobody at either the Education Department, my employer, or the Tax Office could tell me where the pay deductions were kept until they were offset against the debt. I was also told that if I wanted my debt paid off immediately I would have to send in a cheque for the exact amount owing to the Tax Office!
This scenario discriminates against people who cannot afford to pay upfront fees. Not only is the money deducted from pay but for that to take immediate effect the person has to pay the figure again to the Tax Office. In my case, I had actually had more than enough taken from my pay and could not afford to send a separate cheque in for the amount to be offset against the debt. I also had to fill out a form and get a letter from my employer to stop further deductions as I was told that deductions would normally continue until the end of the financial year. The outcome was that although I had had the amount deducted I was still charged $11 to index the amount for the whole financial year as it was not immediately offset. This complicated arrangement shows clearly how the introduction of fees has discriminated against poorer people.
We are now the parents of a 12 and 14 yar old, both of whom we hope will be able to attend a university or technical college. I am very concerned that our daughters who are both quite bright might be unable to attend commensurate with their interests and abilities if we cannot afford the fees. We are in our early forties, earning a low-middle income which is boosted only by my relief and temporary teaching which is not guaranteed income. What meagre savings we have (about 17000) are going to be fully used just paying upfront fees to get the 25% discount or conversely getting our children to borrow. If our children were at university now they would not qualify for Austudy as, on our basic income without me working much, we earn about $2000 over the income means test. As for trying to provide for our retirement we now have to choose between that and providing for our children's education. We are worried that such an enormous outlay might also hinder our ability to partially support our children as young adults if they too find it difficult to gain employment in today's job market. We want to educate our daughters to give them the best possible chance of employement and financial independence but if, at the end of that , they do not get jobs as early as hoped our financial circumstances are going to be very difficult. We are only better off than some because we save and do not buy luxuries. Our cars are valued at $6400 and $ 10000 respectively. Do any politicians have to make such sacrifices for an education?
Another effect of fees is essential to mention. Australia has one of the developed world's most sex-segregated workforces. I have met people as recently as 1996 who refer to their daughters getting married so their education is less of a priority than their sons' education! This outdated attitude combined with the Federal government's cap on subsidised childcare at 20 hours per week will lead to women being less likely to have the financial support for studying courses such as veterinary science, medicine and law which lead to higher incomes. With the government's cuts to affirmative action and the fact that businesses will no longer be named for breaching Equal Opportunity guidelines what limited progress women have made seems likely to be slowed or negated . Because of my studies and our unemployment I qualified for a childcare subsidy in the 1980s and this enabled me to do relief teaching as well to keep off the unemployment benefit. With the present cap announced in the budget I would only be able to do two and a half days of relief a week, which combined with childcare fees, would not be helpful at all to establishing financial independence if we were still unemployed.
Politicians need to talk to average people to find out the real effects of such policies!
Factors Affecting the Demand for and Provision of Higher Education over the next 10-20 years.
* age of population and birth rate
* degree of movement in employment-eg.some people might change jobs at least 4 times in their lives
* affordability for all-some groups of people are already being disadvantaged by the introduction of fees. The numbers of overseas students should not affect the places made available to Australian students, including mature-aged people.
* The attitudes of business people and other sections of the community towards higher education and particular courses-how conservative are their views of the purpose of higher education?
* The degree to which the TAFE and other schemes such as the apprenticeship scheme succeed in attracting students of both sexes and a range of ethnic groups and age-groups
In summary I believe that higher education has two important functions, neither of which should be usurped. As part of a democratic country university has the unique role of producing and developing the nation's thinkers. Other countries which have suffered from dictatorship have been known for imprisoning their thinkers, many of them students, as a means to maintain authoritarian control over the people. This belief in education for its own sake as an integral part of the right to free thought and speech should never be undermined so that some sections of the community who are poor cannot exercise their desire to develop their thinking. The argument made recently that with fees people who could not normally qualify for a place will be able to buy a place at a university is ridiculous as it ignores the mentally rigorous studying and ability that is required to complete a degree. More importantly is the fact that thousands of people who have traditionally missed out on places because of discriminatory practices, for example, women, mature-aged, low socio-economic, non-English speaking migrants and Aboriginals, will face further discrimination. Despite their ability, with limited income they may not be able to attend at all or may end up in less expensive courses which are less likely to lead to lucrative employment.
Universities also need to have a strong role in being relevant to employment as, in the past TAFE graduates have had a much greater chance of gaining employment than the majority of university graduates. However, to make this the only function of universities means that they will be exactly the same as Technical and Further Education institutions with little attention to the need for creative and independent thought.
It is also a fallacy that all university graduates are highly paid. Teachers and nurses are two groups whose pay is usually considerably less than that of men who are working on mine sites and in certain other male-dominated industries. Some university students never gain fulltime employment or do not get employment commensurate with their qualifications. I have been told of university graduates with excellent qualifications being underemployed at the bottom rungs of the public service, doing clerical work for low pay.
The current proposals are inequitable and a backward step towards making Australia "a clever country.' I will continue to lobby vigorously any government which threatens the human rights of its people. I would appreciate a response to my submission and I sincerely hope that my children do not have to face the return of past discriminatory practices. My vote and that of others who feel the same way will be used against such inequality.