Source: Murray Darling Basin Authority
JASON CLARE, MINISTER FOR EDUCATION: Thanks very much for coming along this morning.
I’m here at the University of Tasmania’s campus right here in the heart of Sydney training the next generation of nurses and paramedics. And a couple of weeks ago we kicked off for the first time paid prac. That’s financial support.
Paid prac is financial support for teaching students, for nursing students, for midwifery students and for social work students to provide them with a little bit of financial help while they do the practical part of their training, with the practical part of their university degree.
Placement poverty is a real thing. As we developed the Universities Accord, one of the things that leapt out time after time talking to students was the financial challenges that come with doing the practical part of your university degree. And students over there in the background mentioned it to me just a minute ago. One student told me that she had to delay or extend her degree for a year just because of the financial challenges of doing your prac and having enough money to put food on the table, to pay your bills. This is one of a whole suite of recommendations in the Universities Accord that we’re implementing.
Another thing that came out of the Universities Accord was the reform that is needed to our HECS system, or what we used to call HECS – what we now call HELP – to student debt. Next week I’ll introduce two pieces of legislation into the Federal Parliament. The first cuts students debt by 20 per cent and the second one will cut funding to child care centres that aren’t up to scratch.
On the first bill, this is something that we promised the Australian people during the election campaign – that we would cut the student debt of 3 million Australians by 20 per cent. It’s worth something in the order of $16 billion dollars. And for the average Australian with a student debt it will cut their debt by more than $5,500. It will take a lot of weight off the shoulders of a lot of young Australians who are just out of uni, just getting started, just getting on their feet looking to move out of home or save up to get a mortgage. That money taken off their HECS bill will make a world of difference.
And the other bill that we’ll introduce next week, as I said, will cut funding from child care centres that aren’t up to scratch. This is something that we promised in the last week of Parliament before the election was called. We did that in response to the revelations that came out of the Four Corners exposé earlier this year about abuse and neglect in child care centres.
The truth is that if we want real reform in early education and care, if we want every child care centre to pay attention to safety, to give it the priority that it needs and deserves, then the most powerful weapon the Federal Government has to wield here is money. Child care centres don’t work, don’t operate without the child care subsidy. It represents about 70 per cent of the funding that runs a child care centre.
The purpose of this legislation isn’t to shut child care centres down, it’s to raise standards up. What it will do is set conditions on centres that if they don’t meet the sort of standards that parents expect and that our kids deserve, then funding will be suspended or removed entirely. And, as I said, the purpose of this is not to shut centres down but to lift standards up. It’s just one of the things that we need to do to improve the safety of children in our child care centres.
Today I’m also releasing this document, which is a roadmap of some of the key reforms that we will roll out in education over the next 12 months. It doesn’t set out everything, but it sets out some of the key reforms, including this legislation to cut student debt by 20 per cent, including this legislation to cut funding to child care centres that aren’t up to scratch. But this year we will also introduce legislation to improve the integrity of the international education system and legislation to permanently establish an Australian Tertiary Education Commission. That and much more that’s needed to make our education system better and fairer and safer.
Happy to take some questions.
JOURNALIST: Minister, on child care, when can we expect to see a national child care worker register up and running, and what’s the process from here to establish that?
CLARE: It’s a good question. I was asked this question this morning. Work is already underway on that. States and territories have agreed that we need one and we need to accelerate the work to stand that up.
The first steps are what the states are taking now – Victoria has already said that it will augment its existing teacher register to include the educators that work in their centres. They think that they can do that over the course of the next few months. What we want to do is see all states build that up and then join it up. So that work is underway with states at the moment as well as the federal authority that’s responsible in this area, called ACECQA.
JOURNALIST: You have acknowledged that the government has been too slow on child care reform. Who’s the minister responsible for that, and who do you hold responsible for the fact that it has been slow?
CLARE: I’ve been pretty blunt. I’ve said that, yes, action has been taken but more action is needed and it needs to happen quicker. I don’t think Australian parents are interested in excuses here. They want action. And action requires all levels of government to work together and the industry to join in as well.
Have a look at the revelations today that another 800 children have to get tested, blood tests and urine tests. Think about the anxiety that mums and dads are going through today, think about the trauma that kids are going to have to go through with all of that testing.
Now, the company that runs those centres should have known where this bloke was and when he was working there. The Victorian Government is working as quickly as they can to track all of this down. But it highlights to me the importance of having a national database or a national register like the one you just asked in the previous question so you can track people down when they cross borders, when they move centres.
JOURNALIST: And what point do you think it would become – you know, that particular case, that person moved around a lot. At what point do you think it would become suspicious if someone within the system was moving around a lot?
CLARE: So conscious this is a live investigation, so let’s pose this question in general terms.
JOURNALIST: Yeah.
CLARE: If we build this register the right way it helps us to identify or prompt red flags when somebody is moving for the wrong reasons. There’ll be some times people who will move between centre and centre because they’re labour hire, but there may be instances where people are moving from centre to centre because they’re quietly being moved on.
If the system works the way it needs to work, when something is not right, the police are called and the regulator comes in. And, if necessary, the centre is shut down.
JOURNALIST: We’re hearing some parents demand that centres only have female staff. What do you think of that?
CLARE: I think you might have asked me this question, Fiona, last week, there’s a bit of media about this. Have a look at the Four Corners evidence that shows that this is not just a problem with blokes. It’s a problem with women as well. We’ve had royal commissions. We’ve had the child safety review that I commissioned after that serial paedophile was arrested and convicted in Queensland. We know what we need to do here. In none of those reports did they recommend this. What they’re recommending is that register, they’re recommending national mandatory safety training so that the 99.9 per cent of people who work in our centres who are good, honest, hard-working people who love our kids and care for them and educate our kids have the skills they need to identify the person that’s up to no good, and things like CCTV so that we can deter bad people from doing bad things and help police when bad things happen. There’ll be individual centres that will talk to mums and dads about the way in which they operate in the system. But just cutting blokes out of it all together is not going to be the solution.
JOURNALIST: Is it discrimination, Minister?
CLARE: I don’t think there’s any example of any other profession in the country where it’s gender specific. The more important point I want to stress here is if we’re serious here about making sure that our kids are looked after and they’re safe, just identifying one gender is not the way to do it.
JOURNALIST: And also just on a follow-up on this matter, parents have naturally lost confidence in the system because of what’s happened. Some parents are now opting for in-home care where grandparents or relatives look after kids. Would you ever envisage a situation where the government might subsidise something like that, where parents or grandparents got paid to look after their grandchildren or –
CLARE: That’s not something the government is considering.
What we want to make sure of is that the system is as safe as it needs to be. We want it to be affordable, we want it to be accessible, but most important of all we want our kids to be as safe as they possibly can be.
Now, this is an essential service for mums and dads. There’s more than a million mums and dads out there today who are watching this, it might be in their own workplace. They might be working from home, but they know how important this is. They can’t live the lives that they’re living without this. But it’s also important for their kids, too. It’s providing them with the building blocks for the education they’re yet to have.
If you ask principals and teachers at schools, they’ll tell you that they can identify the kids when they first arrive at primary school that have been in early education and care, whether it’s sitting up straight, whether it’s listening or whether it’s having those literacy and numeracy fundamentals. All of those things make them ready to learn.
Now, at the moment there’s lots of kids in early education and care, but there’s some that are still missing out because they’re from really poor and disadvantaged backgrounds. And they start school already behind. So, we’ve got to make the system better. We’ve got to make the system fairer. But, most importantly, we need to make the system safer.
JOURNALIST: Do you support Jillian Segal’s policies to withhold funding from universities if they fail to stop or address antisemitism?
CLARE: So, we’re considering Jillian Segal’s report, the Special Envoy on antisemitism. I won’t respond today to those recommendations. But there are things that we are already doing in this space. I need to underline the point that there is no place for the poison of antisemitism in our universities.
JOURNALIST: So, you won’t say whether you support –
CLARE: Hang on.
JOURNALIST: Sorry.
CLARE: There’s no place for the poison of racism in all of its ugly and obnoxious forms in our universities or anywhere else. I’m not going to say today what our response to that recommendation will be. What I will say is we’ve taken a number of steps already. We’ve established a National Student Ombudsman for the first time so students that make complaints to their universities that are unheard have an independent person to complain to. And that ombudsman is up and running right now.
Second is TEQSA, who is the higher education regulator, already has powers in this area, whether it’s to put conditions on universities or to apply to a court to impose fines on universities. There’s an open question about the powers that TEQSA has today and whether they should be changed. That’s something that is being considered right now as part of a broader review of university governance.
The other thing I would say is that I don’t intend to look at this report in isolation. But next month the Government will receive a report from the Special Envoy in Combating Islamophobia, and so we wait to see what his recommendations will be. And broader than that, I’ve asked the Race Discrimination Commissioner to conduct a review of racism in our universities. The fact is it exists in our universities in all its ugly forms – ask Indigenous students, ask Islamic students, ask Asian students, ask international students, ask the people who work in our universities of different backgrounds, and they’ll tell you that it is real and that action is needed.
Before we consider those recommendations to their final conclusion, I want to look at the recommendations of the Special Envoy on Islamophobia, and I also want to see the work of the Race Discrimination Commissioner.
JOURNALIST: Just on that same topic, does that mean you probably won’t expect the Government’s response to those recommendations, including funding, until after those reports come down? And there were also some specific mentions of social media and growing antisemitism amongst young people because of social media. Would you back an awareness campaign or the report’s recommendation of a project to support trusted voices to publicly refute antisemitic views?
CLARE: That’s a little outside my portfolio. I’d make the general point that social media plays a role here. It’s not the only reason, but one of the benefits of removing access to social media for young people under the age of 16 might be that less of this poison enters the ears and eyeballs of our young Australians.
On your first question, we expect to see that report from the Special Envoy on Islamophobia next month. We’ll get the report from the Race Discrimination Commissioner later this year. But I do think I need to look at all of those reports that might make different recommendations here. I want to tackle racism in whatever form it comes.
JOURNALIST: So, it would be a holistic response, not just addressing antisemitism?
CLARE: There are recommendations in that report that apply to education. There’s recommendations that apply to other parts of government as well.
JOURNALIST: So, it won’t be accepted in full, the recommendations?
CLARE: I didn’t say that. Don’t put words in my mouth.
JOURNALIST: At the same time, then?
CLARE: I’m saying that we’re considering it carefully. We’ve got to consult as part of that. I want to see what the Special Envoy on Islamophobia has to say as well. I think that’s fair. I think that’s the right thing to do. But it’s not just antisemitism and it’s not just Islamophobia – ask Indigenous kids at university today and they’ll say, “well, don’t forget me.”
JOURNALIST: So next month we’ll expect –
CLARE: Next month, we’ll receive the report from the Special Envoy on Islamophobia.
JOURNALIST: And then you’ll hand down – or you’ll say whether you adopt the recommendations?
CLARE: Next month we’ll receive the report from the Special Envoy on Islamophobia. Later this year, we’ll get the report from the Race Discrimination Commissioner, which will look at this across the board.
JOURNALIST: And I do have just one more on funding and then we can go back to child care. But there have been some comparisons of this funding issue to the Trump administration, what we’ve seen with Harvard and Columbia University. Is that really something that a Labor Government would consider doing – removing funding from a public institution? So, isn’t that kind of a gross overreach, as some people have said?
CLARE: I’ll make no comment on that. Have a look at my previous answer. I made the point that TEQSA, the regulator, has powers here already. They’re different in kind to what’s being recommended in this report. But they enable TEQSA to go in and either put conditions on a university or to penalise them, to apply to a court to issue fines. There’s an open question about the role that TEQSA plays here. They’re already playing an important role in helping universities to lift their standards. I mentioned a couple of pieces of work that are ongoing in Government at the moment. There’s a separate piece of work on improving the governance of our universities generally. You would have seen reports today from chancellors, which I welcome, about how do we improve the way in which decisions are made about the remuneration of vice chancellors. That makes sense on its face to me, but that body that’s doing that work about the governance of our universities will present its recommendations to Government in October of this year.
JOURNALIST: On that, can I just ask you – this is a bit outlandish – but do you think VCs are overpaid?
CLARE: Well –
JOURNALIST: Given that
CLARE: My answer to that is that I think it makes sense – I think it makes a lot of sense, the decisions around the pay of vice-chancellors to be considered by the Remuneration Tribunal. That’s what chancellors have suggested today. When you think about it, public universities are largely funded by public funds. Politicians’ salaries are set by the Remuneration Tribunal. So are the salaries of judges and public servants. But I will wait to see that report, which we’ll get in a couple of months, about reforms to the governance of universities, not just salaries of vice‑chancellors but also what more we need to do in areas of wage theft and making sure that everybody who works in universities are properly paid. And then broader reforms that they’re considering about the councils, the senates, the boards of universities, how they operate, who are represented on them, to make sure that our universities are fit for the future.
Our universities are incredibly important and they’re going to be more important tomorrow than they are today, just like TAFEs. When I was a kid less than 10 per cent of people had a university degree. Now it’s almost 50 per cent. We know that by the middle of this decade even more kids will go on to uni and more will go on to TAFE, and we’ve got to make sure that our whole tertiary education system is set up for them. And this is part of it.
JOURNALIST: Oh, hi Minister Clare, just back to child care, we learned yesterday that accused paedophile Joshua Brown worked at an additional four daycare centres, bringing the total now to 23. My question is: does the casualised nature of the workforce pose risks to children? And how will a centralised system for monitoring workers that you have planned actually work?
CLARE: This question gives me an opportunity to talk about the pay rise that’s rolling out for child care workers now. My older cousin has worked in the sector for 30 years. I remember when my eldest was first in child care I said, “how do I pick a good centre?” And she said, “find a place where the team has been there forever. Where they’re permanent and where they love working there and they all know each other, and they all know the kids.” Right. One of the benefits of paying people more is more people want to do the job. And we’ve seen already with the start of the rollout of the 15 per cent pay rise, more people applying to work in the sector and drop in vacancies. That’s going to help with that balance about permanency as well as casual workers.
I really do worry that with all of the horror that mums and dads are experiencing that people who work in this sector are just as angry and just as horrified with what they’re seeing and that a lot of people are feeling like there’s a target on their back and that they might not want to work here. We need good people in this sector more than ever, and this pay rise is one part of that.
In terms of how the register will work, that’s something that my Department is working with state and territory departments on right now. We’ve agreed that we need to do it. We’re working on the system and how it should work. I talked about setting it up and joining it up. And this will be one of the things that’s considered when education ministers meet for a standalone meeting on child safety next month.
JOURNALIST: Can I ask one more question about the Segal recommendations?
CLARE: Sure.
JOURNALIST: Former Labor Minister Ed Husic today came out and sort of told the Government not to be too heavy-handed, is how he put it, in responding to the antisemitism crisis. Do you have any thoughts on that? And do you think the report enacted in full would be too heavy-handed?
CLARE: It may be an opportunity to say that Ed’s a great bloke and he’s one of my best mates, and I take his counsel and advice all the time. And I think you can see from my answer today that this is something that we’re going to give careful consideration to, having a look at it not in isolation but having a look at racism in all its ugly forms across our universities and across our community.
JOURNALIST: Is this something that you think that federal resources should be used to police, when it comes to universities and how they deal with these things?
CLARE: Sorry, Fi, just explain a little.
JOURNALIST: Is it – so when we’re talking about universities dealing with antisemitism and other related issues, should federal resources be used to monitor how they’re going with that?
CLARE: They already are. They already are. When you think about the decision that I made and that I got states to agree to set up the student ombudsman, it was very much about that. It wasn’t just about that. All of the horrific evidence that came to me when I first got this position about the sexual assault and harassment of particularly female students in our universities, in particular, in student accommodation, made me believe that action was required, and action was taken. And that’s why that ombudsman was set up.
That involves, I think more than $50 million dollars of taxpayer money, Commonwealth money, to set that agency up, to set that ombudsman up. And we’ve given that ombudsman real teeth so that when she makes a recommendation universities have to implement it. There’ll be legislation I’ll re-introduce into the parliament around that as well when parliament returns.
The investment that we’ve made to ask the Race Discrimination Commissioner to conduct a review into respect at unis, into racism in our universities, I think is evidence that I do believe the Commonwealth has a role here to make sure that our universities are safe places too, that many don’t feel afraid to go to uni. We want more people to want to study at uni. These are places where people study, work and live. They’ve got to be as safe as they possibly can be. There is no place for any type of racism in our country, whether it’s in our unis or anywhere else.
JOURNALIST: Dom, anything from you?
JOURNALIST: Yes, thank you. Just want to go back to the HECS stuff.
CLARE: Sure, mate.
JOURNALIST: And ask: with the introduction of the legislation next week, after that, when can we expect the next tranche of university reforms from the Accord? Do you have – is HECS still the focus of that tranche in terms of, you know, how it’s indexed, some other tweaks that can be made, will that be looked at soon?
CLARE: Thanks for the question. It’s an opportunity for me to explain in a little bit more detail the bill that will go in next week.
Number one, it will cut student debt by 20 per cent, but it will also make structural changes to the way HECS, or student debt operates. It will increase the amount of money you have to earn before you start paying off HECS from 54,000 to I think it’s about $67,000.
So, in other words, you don’t start paying off your university degree until your degree starts to pay off for you. And it makes an even more important structural change to the way in which you pay off the debt. It will effectively reduce the amount that you have to pay off each and every year when you’re on a low income.
So, the best way to explain that is if you’re on an income of $70,000 today, when this legislation passes it will reduce the minimum amount you have to repay every year by about $1,300. So that’s a real cost of living benefit for a lot of people that are on very modest incomes.
JOURNALIST: Just a two-parter then, still on HECS: in terms of has any modelling been done that by raising that people are worse off in the long term? For example, less payments equals more money that then gets indexed each year, so if you don’t reach that threshold, you know, for three more years, you’ve got a higher HECS debt that gets indexed and it kind of compounds?
CLARE: Okay, that’s an important opportunity to make the point that this is a minimum repayment. There is nothing that stops or will stop people from making additional repayments if they choose to do so.
JOURNALIST: And then the indexation – sorry, just to clarify – the indexation I was referring to was how HECS, the money gets taken out every month, but then it gets only subtracted, I think, from the debt at the end of each year, or in June or something like that. So, indexation is applied.
CLARE: Okay.
JOURNALIST: Is that what you’re looking at as well? Is that part of the next tranche?
CLARE: So, in last year’s budget we announced part 1 of our response to the Universities Accord. This is a blueprint for the next decade. It’s a big report with a lot of recommendations. We have implemented now in part or in full about 31 of those recommendations. But over the – in part with the support of the Tertiary Education Commission, which has now been established in an interim reform a week or so ago, we will now look at other recommendations in that report and what the next steps need to be in reforming our higher education system, in making it better and fairer. And in the report, I released today, it touches on some of those things.
One of them, which is not the sexiest thing – it won’t make the front page of the paper – but it’s a structural change which is going to be very important is changing the way we fund our universities. That will start from January of next year. And the introduction for the first time ever of real needs-based funding for our universities.
Last year I struck agreements with every state and territory to fix the funding of our public schools on a needs-basis, like David Gonski said we should all those years ago. Now we want to apply the same sort of model to our universities, so funding follows the students and more students from disadvantaged backgrounds, from the outer suburbs of our cities, from our regions who need more support to not just start a degree but finish a degree get it.
JOURNALIST: And that includes the Jobs Ready Graduate Scheme?
CLARE: That’s something we’re asking ATEC to have a look at. All right. Thank you.
ENDS