campusreview.com.au
There is no denying that, thanks to the vagaries of our federal
system of government, a blame game has begun that is focused
on inadequate public infrastructure, particularly in Sydney and
Melbourne. This debate gained prominent media attention when
Australia’s national population reached 25 million, somewhat
ahead of planning experts’ forecasts. Initially, a historically high
annual migration intake was singled out for blame.
Unfortunately, no sooner had the Coalition government
announced a reduction to the migration program than the major
parties shifted their finger, pointing to our international education
sector. Curiously, record numbers of foreign tourists using
our buses, trains, roads and Airbnb apartments were exempt
from blame.
If there has been anything positive to come out of the politics of
big-city infrastructure, it has been a focus at the top levels of the
federal government on what incentives might be available to get
more international students to study in our regional communities.
On the other side of the equation, with a state election
scheduled for NSW in March and a federal election expected by
May, be prepared over the year ahead for the anti-international
student narrative to play out into negative policy announcements.
SKILLED MIGRATION AND EMPLOYABILITY
After her election in 2016, it did not take Pauline Hanson long to
single out international students for particular attention. An urgency
motion, sponsored by her party in the Senate, called on the federal
government to quantify how many jobs were being lost by young
Australians to students from overseas.
Happily, in the ensuing parliamentary debate, senior politicians
from all major parties disagreed with the One Nation motion. Key
points raised included that international students were willing to
work in many jobs that young Australians refused to engage in,
that Australia gained a $32 billion a year economic benefit from
this sector, and that many young Australians also gained work
experience when they travelled and studied overseas.
What is less understood is how course-related employability
opportunities now act as a major pull factor for overseas
students in choosing their study destination country. Our nation’s
current policy of permitting international students to have paid
employment for 20 hours per week while studying and, in many
cases, to obtain a two to four-year post-study work visa, has proven
popular. Yet, Canada is still offering students these same work
rights plus extensive onshore migration pathways. New Zealand
recently enhanced its post-study work right offerings to be more
generous than our version.
If our political community requires any evidence of the
importance of skilled migration to students, they only need
to look to the recent experience of Western Australia. In its
first policy decision, the McGowan Labor government caved
in to trade union pressure and abolished the state’s long-
standing regional sponsored migration points and significantly
reduced skilled migration job categories. Twelve months later, a
22 per cent decline in the state’s English language enrolments
have now forced a partial policy wind back. While a recent
federal treasury paper highlighted that only 16 per cent of our
international students now achieve a migration outcome, the
perception in the wider Australian community is that this figure
must be far higher. As our two major parties start to advocate
for population caps in the run-up to a federal election, there is a
international education
danger in 2019 that full-fee-paying international students will be
thrown into this policy mix.
PURPOSE-BUILT STUDENT ACCOMMODATION
According to the biennial International Student Barometer Survey,
Australia’s Achilles’ heel is the high cost of accommodation. In
recognition of this, many of our public universities have been giving
greater emphasis to encouraging safe, affordable, on-campus (or
close to campus) rental options. The advent of large multinational
purpose-built student accommodation (PBSA) providers has added
considerably to the available housing stock.
Unfortunately, recent federal and state governments’ legislative
agendas are now discouraging the supply of sufficient PBSA
developments to accommodate international students. At the
federal level, the proposed PBSA Treasury Laws Amendment
(Making Sure Foreign Investors Pay Their Fair Share of Tax in
Australia and Other Measures) Bill 2018 will double the taxation rate
currently paid by PBSA providers.
At the Victorian state level, blanket changes made to the
Residential Tenancies Act will permit any student tenant to
effectively give 14 days’ notice of their intent to break a lease and
allow them to have large and small pets in their often very small
student rooms.
As we look to 2019, there is genuine concern that new PBSA
developments might not now proceed and that the additional
costs and taxation imposed by the above legislation could well be
passed on to student tenants.
OTHER REGULATORY BARRIERS
There is little doubt that our reputation for delivering world class
courses to overseas students has been a key driver of success.
The advent of the national regulators, ASQA and TEQSA,
together with the Tuition Protection Service, has served to
underpin Australia’s reputation as a high-quality study destination.
Yet, even in the regulatory arena, we have scope to improve.
The fact that the principal education provider still wears the
entire academic progress risk for an international student who
might leave them after only six months is clearly inequitable.
Costs of offshore delivery can also be uncompetitive because of
Australia’s regulatory oversight.
In equal measure, ASQA’s requirement that any international
student hoping to undertake a short-duration barista or first aid
course must do so with a CRICOS registered provider is becoming
an onerous requirement for public universities and TAFE. In effect,
it serves to stop an international student from taking up some
course-related field placements and limits their opportunities for
part-time employment during their studies.
All of the above issues will be front and centre as we approach a
federal election early in the new year. Happily, there is a great deal
of good will for the relevant peak bodies and industry associations
to continue to work together to gain student-focused outcomes.
In all of this, the great external dynamic for 2019 will of course
be Australia’s geopolitical relationships with our key student
source countries. Unfortunately for our sector, this is the one
issue that international education stakeholders find very difficult
to influence. ■
Phil Honeywood is chief executive officer of the International
Education Association of Australia (IEAA).
9