Edited transcript
Press Conference by the Hon Dr Brendan Nelson MP
Wednesday 30 July 2003
Parliament House Canberra
This afternoon I am releasing a detailed analysis of the
Australian Labor Party’s Higher Education policies, which were
announced and released a week ago. The analysis has been undertaken
by the Commonwealth Department of Education, Science and Training
and by the Commonwealth Department of Finance and Administration.
What the analysis has found is that the Australian Labor Party
has under funded its Higher Education Policies by at least $257M.
That includes $6.3M under funding for additional places in
universities, at least $28M under funding for universities for the
indexation of university funding. But the biggest black hole is
$218.9M under funding for reducing HECS charges for Science and
Mathematics students in Australian universities.
The Department of Finance and the Department of Education,
Science and Training estimate that the costs of reducing HECS by
$1600 per year for students in Science and Mathematics would be
$262.5M. The Labor Party has budgeted that cost at $43.6M, leaving a
$218.9M deficit.
What this means is that more than 40 Australian universities will
be required to find some $220M in order to offset the reduced
funding that they will receive through HECS contributions from
students that will undertake Science and Mathematics Degrees through
those institutions.
I’d also, specifically, in drawing your attention to the
Australian Labor Party Policy, on page 14, it says "Labor believes
that areas of national skills shortage, like maths and science,
should be in the lowest HECS bands to encourage more students to
pursue these fields. Under Aim Higher, students of maths and science
will pay nearly $5000 less in fees for a three year university
degree". It then says "Labor will place mathematics and science in
Band 1 of HECS to reduce course fees by $1600 per annum". These
statements were repeated both by Mr Crean and Mrs Macklin at their
media conference, when the Policy was released, and have been
subsequently repeated in numerous radio and electronic interviews
the length and breadth of the country.
Question:
What does this shortfall say about the overall credibility of the
package?
Dr Nelson:
The credibility of the Labor Party Higher Education Policy today is
in tatters. I think it’s well known that Simon Crean has all the
vision of Mr Magoo, without the economic credentials. What the Labor
Party has done is lift the name of its package from the Blair
Government’s Higher Education Programmes, it’s adopted more than
three quarters of the Governments Higher Education Reform Packages
here in Australia. It’s beaten the mining industry, and its 83,000
employees and workers around the head, to the tune of $467M, and in
addition to that proposes to continue to run a loan scheme to some
of the poorest students in the country who have little hope of
repaying them, in order to fund its programme. Simon Crean’s
economic credibility is such that the average Australian would
hesitate before giving them the national chequebook.
Question:
Dr Nelson, isn’t it a fact that poorer students have come out today
and said that there’s nothing in your scholarship programme that
would help them?
Dr Nelson:
There is $161M in the Government’s Higher Education Reform Package
to support students with their education costs and their
accommodation costs. I might contrast that with $125M proposed
changes to Commonwealth Youth Allowance and indexation issues in the
Labor Party Reform Package.
Question:
Are the Labor Party costings based on the same funding formula that
you used?
Dr Nelson:
You’ll find that the detailed analysis by the Commonwealth
Departments of Education and of Finance will confirm that the Labor
Party Policies that have been adopted from the Commonwealth, those
figures are confirmed. But there are three areas where the Labor
Party has got it wrong, and in one case seriously so, to the tune of
$220M.
Question:
I suppose I’m just wondering, on that $200M figure, if they are
using the same funding formula that you used, does that have any
implications for your costings in terms of this black hole that
you’ve found?
Dr Nelson:
There is absolutely no consequence whatsoever for the Commonwealth’s
costings, which have been subject to rigorous analysis, both
internally and externally by Government and external agencies. Those
numerous policies that the Labor Party has adopted, which are
Commonwealth policies, you’ll see those costings are verified in
this analysis. But in some areas where the Labor Party is proposing
to increase university places, they have under funded those costs.
They’ve seriously underestimated the cost of indexation to
universities, which you’ll see in the analysis. But most
importantly, there is a $220M black hole in relation to reducing
HECS charges for Science and Mathematics students. In the State of
Queensland it means $42M less for Queensland universities; $66M less
in New South Wales; $58M less for universities in Victoria; $17M
less for universities in South Australia; $22M less in the State of
Western Australia and $4M less for the University of Tasmania.
This suggests a significant lack of economic and policy
credibility on the part of the Australian Labor Party. I’ll leave
the analysis with you.
Question:
Just out of interest, how much did that analysis cost? How many
people have you had working on that? I mean has it taken taxpayer
funded public servants a week and a bit to come up with that?
Dr Nelson:
The analysis has obviously been detailed, it’s been carried on over
a week. You would expect there would be a number of people working
on it. In terms of the precise detail I’d be happy to get back to
you.
Question:
Is it appropriate for public servants to be analysing Labor policy
in that way?
Dr Nelson:
I think it’s appropriate, as the Commonwealth Departments are
continually analysing policies that are proposed by any range of
organisations within Australia. And I think the Australian taxpayer
would be concerned to know that the Commonwealth Department is
analysing policies that are proposed by what is an alternative
government.
Question:
It’s quite a fast turnaround compared to other (inaudible) to look
at analysis of your funding.
Dr Nelson:
Much of the Labor Party Policy, you’ll see, is Government’s.
top |
