Higher education: the cost increases

When the Hawke Labor Government in the mid-1980s introduced a 
small "administrative fee" for universities in the mid-1980s, we 
were reassured that it was not a course fee and that free 
tertiary education (introduced by the Whitlam Government almost 
15 years earlier) would remain free. Bit by bit the so-called 
administrative fee was increased. This fee was the forerunner to 
the reintroduction of fees.

Since then the Federal Government, which fully funded student 
places, has gradually wound back its contribution. Fees have been 
reintroduced and gradually increased, and students expected to 
pay a larger proportion of the cost of their studies.

Students were selected on the basis of merit and could pay their 
fee upfront (with a discount) or through the Higher Education 
Contribution Scheme (HECS). HECS is a form of student loan with 
repayment deferred until a student has an income of a certain 
level. Under HECS the government is still making a contribution 
towards the cost of the course — albeit one that is getting 
smaller each year.

In more recent years the government has allowed universities to 
admit a certain proportion of students on a full-fee paying basis 
(no government subsidy) who make an upfront payment for their 
studies. These are students who failed to be selected on the 
basis of merit for a HECS place. That is, they can buy a place — 
if they have the money.

In order to encourage students to pay their fees "up front", the 
federal government is to offer such students a loan of up to 
$50,000, repayments of which don't start until the student's 
annual income reaches $30,000. Under current guidelines, 
universities may admit up to 35 percent of their students on this 
basis.

University courses incur average HECS debts of $20,000 per 
student for a degree. However, course fees vary widely. Contrary 
to the Howard Government's previous reassurances, some 50 
Australian university courses now cost $100,000 or more. 
Universities are being encouraged to treat their courses as 
commodities, and to charge whatever fees the market will bear. 
Medicine at the University of Melbourne now comes with a $200,000 
price tag!

As the number of "up front" fee-paying students rises, the income 
for universities from fees increases. Having forced them to 
resort to such measures, the government then uses the phoney 
argument that the universities are showing increasing "self-
reliance" to justify even further funding cuts.

The aim of the $50,000 loan is to encourage or make it easier for 
more students (or their parents) to buy a place.

This further disadvantages students from less wealthy backgrounds 
who are increasingly forced to earn income to support themselves 
through university. This reduces their study time, which in turn 
adversely affects their academic performance. An increasing 
number of these students will also resort to the loan scheme to 
buy their way into courses. 

Secondly, if you're an "up front" fee student with limited 
finances, the $50,000 government loan for degrees will not cover 
the fees required in later years of the more expensive courses. 
Banks and other lending institutions are generally unwilling to 
offer such students a loan to cover the gap. The only recourse in 
many cases is for the student's parents to make up the 
difference, if necessary by mortgaging the family home.

Each year more of the cost of education is being shifted on to 
the shoulders of lower and middle-income earners. The strategy is 
clearly to have the government ease out of the commitment to its 
part of the merit-based HECS system (in the same way that free 
tertiary education was abandoned) and to phase in full fee-paying 
courses for the wealthy and a few working class children holding 
corporate-sponsored scholarships.

"Education is a right, not a privilege" was one of the slogans 
used when free tertiary education was won in the 1970s. It time 
to bring it back, before all the gains made then are ripped away.