Bills Digest No. 187 2004–05
Higher Education Support Amendment (Abolition of Compulsory Up-front
Student Union Fees) Bill 2005
WARNING:
This Digest was prepared for debate. It reflects the legislation as introduced
and does not canvass subsequent amendments. This Digest does not have
any official legal status. Other sources should be consulted to determine
the subsequent official status of the Bill.
CONTENTS
Passage History
Purpose
Background
Main Provisions
Endnotes
Contact Officer & Copyright Details
Passage History
Higher Education Support
Amendment (Abolition of Compulsory Up-front Student Union Fees) Bill 2005
Date
Introduced: 16 March 2005
House: House
of Representatives
Portfolio: Education, Science and Training
Commencement: 1 January
2006
The Bill
will amend the Higher Education Support Act 2003 to prevent higher education
providers from requiring their students to become members of student organisations
or to require them to pay fees for services and amenities that are not
of an academic nature.
More detailed background on this issue can be found in the Parliamentary
Library Background Notes at http://libiis1/Library_Services/BN/Education/sp006.doc.
(1)
This Bill is the third attempt by the Howard Government to prohibit compulsory
student unionism. The first was the Higher Education Legislation Amendment
Bill 1999, which was subject to a report by the Senate Employment, Workplace
Relations, Small Business and Education Legislation Committee and did
not progress through the Senate. Then, in September 2003, the Government
introduced the Higher Education Support Amendment (Abolition of Compulsory
Up-front Student Union Fees) Bill 2003 as part of its higher education
reform package, Backing Australia’s Future. The Bill
did not proceed beyond the second reading.
On 16 March 2005 the Minister for Education, Science and Training, the
Hon Dr Brendan Nelson MP, issued a Media Release which set out the compulsory
amenities and services fees payable at each university, together with
an estimate of the total revenue generated – some $162 million in 2005
(this did not include the fees paid by part-time and postgraduate students).(2)
A rough estimate of the total revenue from these fees could be in the
order of $200-250 million.(3) To place this sum in context,
in 2003 these same institutions had total higher education revenues of
$11874 million. Of this, $4899 million was Commonwealth funding, $2096
million was from HECS and related schemes, and $2613 million from higher
education fees and charges.
The Australian Vice-Chancellors’ Committee policy on student organisations
strongly supports the view ‘that fees charged for the provision of services
for students are an obligation of enrolment, whether they are provided
by student organisations or in other ways by the University’.(4)
The policy notes that these fees provide for provision of food outlets,
buildings, meeting rooms, toilets, stationery and second-hand book services,
child care, legal services, health and employment services, assistance
with accommodation and welfare services. The AVCC’s chief executive, John
Mullarvey, has stated that these services will no longer be provided by
universities unless students pay for them voluntarily.
The AVCC policy does provide for exemptions to the requirement to be
a member of a student organisation, but considers that such exempted students
should still be required to pay an amenities and services fee.
It has been argued that the prohibition of compulsory amenities and services
charges will have a disproportionate impact upon regional campuses. ACUMA
(the Australian Campus Union Managers Association) have surveyed eleven
institutions with regional campuses. They claim that most services and
facilities would be closed, with those that remained being operated on
a commercial basis. They anticipate around 550 job losses. ACUMA has also
noted that a number of campuses operate community facilities that could
be in danger of closing if funding is stopped. Examples given are the
Toowoomba sport and recreation facilities operated by the University of
Southern Queensland and the RMIT University facility at Bundoora.(5)
Proponents of the prohibition of compulsory amenities fees argue that
no-one should be forced to pay for services that they do not wish to use
and that universities, because they now operate in a competitive commercial
environment, will themselves fund those amenities and services that they
believe are necessary to attract students. However, it might be argued
that universities with regional campuses are not as well placed as the
major metropolitan institutions to finance such activities. For example,
the Government’s higher education policy statement Backing Australia’s
Future, noted that:
Universities that provide places at regional campuses face higher costs
as a result of location, size and history. Regional campuses generally
have less potential to diversify revenue sources, a smaller capacity
to compete for fee-paying students and a narrower industrial base providing
fewer opportunities for commercial partnerships.(6)
In recognition of these factors, the new Commonwealth Grants Scheme incorporates
a regional loading that will provide $146 million over five years.(7)
There may be a case for revising the loading to further assist some regional
campuses to maintain services that are unavailable commercially because
of the location and size of the campus. It should be noted that even with
the regional loading, higher education resources (and their associated
economic benefits) are directed disproportionately towards the capital
cities.(8)
Item 1 of Schedule 1 inserts a new section 19-37 which provides that
a higher education provider must not require their students to become
members of student organisations or to pay fees for services and amenities
that are not of an academic nature. Sub-section 19-37 (3) provides for
the following exceptions to the prohibition on non-academic fees:
-
fees for goods or services that are essential to the course of study
in which the student is enrolled, so long as the student had the choice
of acquiring them from suppliers other than the higher education provider;
-
fees for goods that either become the property of the student and
that are not intended to be consumed during the course of study; or
food, transport and accommodation associated with field trips.
Item 3 of Schedule 1 inserts a new section 33-37 which provides that
the basic grant payable to a higher education provider can be reduced
if it breaches the conditions imposed by section 19-37. The reduction
is equivalent to $100 for every Commonwealth supported place allocated
to the provider.
-
This link is for internal Parliamentary users only. However, some
of this background material is also available in the Bills Digest
at:
http://www.aph.gov.au/library/pubs/bd/2003-04/04bd058.htm
-
Dr Nelson’s Media Release can be obtained from,
http://www.dest.gov.au/Ministers/Media/Nelson/2005/03/n1062150305.asp
-
The $250 million figure was obtained by assuming that all full-time
students pay the average fee indicated by the Nelson table ($328.35
per student), and that part-time students pay half this amount.
-
The AVCC Policy on student organisations can be obtained from,
http://www.avcc.edu.au/content.asp?page=/policies_programs/student_organisations/index.htm
.
-
Public Submission by ACUMA, January 2005.
-
Our Universities Backing Australia’s Future, p.14.
-
The loading pays an increment for student load in regional campuses
according to the distance from the closest mainland capital city and
the size of the campus. It varies from 1.5 per cent (Wollongong) to
30 per cent (Northern Territory). Details of the loading are set out
in Chapter Four of the Commonwealth Grant Scheme Guidelines see:
http://www.backingaustraliasfuture.gov.au/guidelines/cgs_guide.htm
-
Estimated higher education operating expenditure per resident population
in regional areas was around half that of the capital cities in 1997.
It would then have required additional expenditure of around $2 billion
p.a. to bring regional per capita expenditure up to metropolitan levels.
See the Parliamentary Library Research Note, Higher
Education in Regional Australia (Number 21, 1999-2000). There
have been no major shifts in funding patterns to fundamentally alter
this situation since then.
Kim Jackson
22 June 2005
Bills Digest Service
Information and Research Services
This paper has been prepared to support the work of the Australian Parliament
using information available at the time of production. The views expressed
do not reflect an official position of the Information and Research Service,
nor do they constitute professional legal opinion.
IRS staff are available to discuss the paper's contents
with Senators and Members and their staff but not with members of the
public.
ISSN 1328-8091
© Commonwealth of Australia 2005
Except to the extent of the uses permitted under the Copyright Act
1968, no part of this publication may be reproduced or transmitted
in any form or by any means, including information storage and retrieval
systems, without the prior written consent of the Parliamentary Library,
other than by members of the Australian Parliament in the course of their
official duties.
Published by the Parliamentary Library, 2005.
|
