Australia’s international education sector faces six months of unprecedented policy chaos, with a Senate stalemate increasing uncertainty on three fronts.
Students’ role in migration is set to become a battleground issue in next year’s election, after the opposition resolved to?block the Labor government’s bill?to?cap overseas enrolments. The coalition parties’ stance also prolongs the visa processing delays caused by the widely reviled?ministerial direction 107?(MD107), which education minister Jason Clare has described as a “de facto cap”.
The bill’s obstruction has also raised a cloud over its other proposals. They include new regulatory powers, transparency requirements and a strengthened “fit and proper” test for registered colleges.
The bill’s explanatory memorandum says these reforms will “limit collusive and unscrupulous business practices” that have encouraged “organised channels of labour exploitation and?human trafficking”. The legislation also contains measures to monitor education agents’ involvement in onshore “transfers”, following rampant?poaching?of university students by cheaper training colleges.
Government senator Tony Sheldon warned that the blocking of the bill would give a “free pass” to “the rip-off merchants, the agent commissions and the shonky operators”. He told parliament that an?inquiry into the bill?by the Senate’s Education and Employment Committee, which he heads, had found “widespread support for these integrity measures”.
The prospect of caps arguably exacerbated integrity issues in the sector, as administrators sought implementation or exemption loopholes. Anecdotally, some institutions were artificially accelerating courses’ start dates and combining undergraduate and postgraduate qualifications in the same degrees, among other ploys.
While universities bemoan MD107’s retention, forthcoming efforts to limit international enrolments may cause them bigger problems. Shadow education minister Sarah Henderson told the Senate that the coalition parties would trump the government’s proposed caps “by getting the migration policy settings right”.
While Ms Henderson has bitterly criticised the “secrecy, uncertainty and unfairness” of the government’s caps, and particularly its impact on private colleges, her main objection was that the proposal “will not even touch the sides” of “the immigration and housing crisis”.
In his May budget reply speech, opposition leader Peter Dutton vowed to cut immigration more steeply than Labor and “to set a cap on foreign students” at metropolitan universities. Ms Henderson said the coalition “maintained the importance of a cap on international students” but the government’s version was “not going to work”.
Australian National University policy analyst Andrew Norton said the opposition’s version could limit the international share of students at each institution to perhaps 35 per cent, the ceiling?advocated?by Deakin University. “The coalition has also signalled it may restrict visas for the partners and children of students,” Professor Norton wrote in?.
Mr Clare said the opposition should release its plans. “It’s time for the Liberal Party to cough up and provide some details on what they’re going to do if they win the next election,” he?.
Migration expert Abul Rizvi said the blocking of the caps proposal was a welcome development. “But if the industry thinks this means a higher level of student visa grants, it’s kidding itself,” he posted on X. “[Mr] Dutton’s net migration target requires a much bigger cut to students than the caps were ever going to deliver.”
The bill was listed for debate in the Senate’s 19 November notice paper but omitted from a subsequent programme.
